Discussion:
A question for Chris/mainframe tech
(too old to reply)
bigdog
2018-07-12 02:35:44 UTC
Permalink
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
Spence
2018-07-13 00:56:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
The more obfuscation, the better.
mainframetech
2018-07-13 01:08:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.

Chris
bigdog
2018-07-13 14:53:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
Anthony Marsh
2018-07-14 03:50:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Logical fallacy. There were no competent medical examiners at the JFK
autopsy.
Post by bigdog
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
claviger
2018-07-14 20:52:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Logical fallacy. There were no competent medical examiners at the JFK
autopsy.
Do you consider yourself a competent medical examiner?
bigdog
2018-07-15 18:02:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Logical fallacy. There were no competent medical examiners at the JFK
autopsy.
Do you consider yourself a competent medical examiner?
This was another of Marsh's inane comments that indicates he didn't even
understand the post he was responding too. My comment had nothing to do
with the medical examiners at the autopsy but in his haste to make his
typical knee jerk response he failed to comprehend that.
Anthony Marsh
2018-07-15 21:52:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by bigdog
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Logical fallacy. There were no competent medical examiners at the JFK
autopsy.
Do you consider yourself a competent medical examiner?
No, but I know some and have debated this with some.
And I have evidence that YOU don't.
mainframetech
2018-07-14 23:45:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
How foolish can you get? I said nothing about when photos were taken.
From what I've seen of the autopsy photos that were 'leaked', they were
altered and I've proved it humorously many times. Showing altered photos
was not noticed by Wecht, so why would he notice anything like we're
talking about? And you'll have to explain to me how that ties in with the
casket switching.

Chris
bigdog
2018-07-15 21:43:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
How foolish can you get? I said nothing about when photos were taken.
From what I've seen of the autopsy photos that were 'leaked', they were
altered and I've proved it humorously many times.
Yes, it's very humorous whenever you think you have proved something.
Post by mainframetech
Showing altered photos
was not noticed by Wecht, so why would he notice anything like we're
talking about? And you'll have to explain to me how that ties in with the
casket switching.
So your only explanation for why all those highly qualified medical
examiners could not see the body alterations is they just didn't notice
them. That's what I mean by humorous.
mainframetech
2018-07-17 17:04:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
How foolish can you get? I said nothing about when photos were taken.
From what I've seen of the autopsy photos that were 'leaked', they were
altered and I've proved it humorously many times.
Yes, it's very humorous whenever you think you have proved something.
Post by mainframetech
Showing altered photos
was not noticed by Wecht, so why would he notice anything like we're
talking about? And you'll have to explain to me how that ties in with the
casket switching.
So your only explanation for why all those highly qualified medical
examiners could not see the body alterations is they just didn't notice
them. That's what I mean by humorous.
WRONG again! You are completely unable to guess what I'm thinking,
which has been shown over the time you have tried. I did NOT say the only
reason is that they didn't notice them. I said that they were limited in
what they were allowed to see. They were allowed to see only what gave
the impression that there was a shooter above and behind JFK who caused
the death.

You were told by the WCR that there was a shot to the BOH that caused
death, but when I show you a photo of the BOH, you can't find the bullet
hole. The strange denial you suffer is to ignore the evidence of your own
eyes! And don't try to escape by saying the photo was not clear enough.
It was plenty clear, so much so that the little red spot could be seen, so
a bullet hole would be easy to see, if it were there. The exact position
of the bullet hole was given by Humes and Boswell, which differed, but
those spots were open and viewable in the photo I showed. Here it is
again:

Loading Image...

Go ahead, deny it again!

And if that photo was used for medical examiners, then you have a
really serious problem in what you're willing to believe.

Chris
bigdog
2018-07-18 04:51:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
How foolish can you get? I said nothing about when photos were taken.
From what I've seen of the autopsy photos that were 'leaked', they were
altered and I've proved it humorously many times.
Yes, it's very humorous whenever you think you have proved something.
Post by mainframetech
Showing altered photos
was not noticed by Wecht, so why would he notice anything like we're
talking about? And you'll have to explain to me how that ties in with the
casket switching.
So your only explanation for why all those highly qualified medical
examiners could not see the body alterations is they just didn't notice
them. That's what I mean by humorous.
WRONG again! You are completely unable to guess what I'm thinking,
You're right. That remains one of the great mysteries of our time.
Post by mainframetech
which has been shown over the time you have tried. I did NOT say the only
reason is that they didn't notice them. I said that they were limited in
what they were allowed to see.
How do you know that? Oh, that's right. They don't agree with your
assessment so OBVIOUSLY they must not have seen all the evidence. There
couldn't be any other explanation. It couldn't be because they know what
they are talking about and you don't.
Post by mainframetech
They were allowed to see only what gave
the impression that there was a shooter above and behind JFK who caused
the death.
I guess that's your excuse for why people far more qualified than you
reached a conclusion that you don't want to accept.
Post by mainframetech
You were told by the WCR that there was a shot to the BOH that caused
death, but when I show you a photo of the BOH, you can't find the bullet
hole.
I don't have to find it. Every qualified medical examiner who saw ALL the
photos and x-rays found it and all agreed it was an entrance wound. I
would be pretty stupid to look at one photo and pretend I know more than
they do.
Post by mainframetech
The strange denial you suffer is to ignore the evidence of your own
eyes! And don't try to escape by saying the photo was not clear enough.
It was plenty clear, so much so that the little red spot could be seen, so
a bullet hole would be easy to see, if it were there. The exact position
of the bullet hole was given by Humes and Boswell, which differed, but
those spots were open and viewable in the photo I showed. Here it is
http://i318.photobucket.com/albums/mm433/JFKAUTOPSYPHOTOS/JFKcolor_boh_autopsy_photo.jpg
Go ahead, deny it again!
I don't need to deny anything. I have ALL the medical examiners who have seen the evidence on my side. Who do you have on your side? Oh, that's right. Paul O'Connor and Jerrol Custer.
Post by mainframetech
And if that photo was used for medical examiners, then you have a
really serious problem in what you're willing to believe.
Somebody who believes the nonsense you do ought not be making disparaging
remarks about what others are willing to believe.
mainframetech
2018-07-19 17:51:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
How foolish can you get? I said nothing about when photos were taken.
From what I've seen of the autopsy photos that were 'leaked', they were
altered and I've proved it humorously many times.
Yes, it's very humorous whenever you think you have proved something.
Post by mainframetech
Showing altered photos
was not noticed by Wecht, so why would he notice anything like we're
talking about? And you'll have to explain to me how that ties in with the
casket switching.
So your only explanation for why all those highly qualified medical
examiners could not see the body alterations is they just didn't notice
them. That's what I mean by humorous.
WRONG again! You are completely unable to guess what I'm thinking,
You're right. That remains one of the great mysteries of our time.
Post by mainframetech
which has been shown over the time you have tried. I did NOT say the only
reason is that they didn't notice them. I said that they were limited in
what they were allowed to see.
How do you know that? Oh, that's right. They don't agree with your
assessment so OBVIOUSLY they must not have seen all the evidence. There
couldn't be any other explanation. It couldn't be because they know what
they are talking about and you don't.
Post by mainframetech
They were allowed to see only what gave
the impression that there was a shooter above and behind JFK who caused
the death.
I guess that's your excuse for why people far more qualified than you
reached a conclusion that you don't want to accept.
WRONG as usual. I accept evidence and I've seen it in this case.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
You were told by the WCR that there was a shot to the BOH that caused
death, but when I show you a photo of the BOH, you can't find the bullet
hole.
I don't have to find it. Every qualified medical examiner who saw ALL the
photos and x-rays found it and all agreed it was an entrance wound. I
would be pretty stupid to look at one photo and pretend I know more than
they do.
There you go! Proving my point! You can't see any evidence, but
you'll believe what you're told even though they can't see the evidence
either. They can only see the AR, which tells them what to think as to
the cause of death. The real cause is overlooked. Maybe intentionally.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The strange denial you suffer is to ignore the evidence of your own
eyes! And don't try to escape by saying the photo was not clear enough.
It was plenty clear, so much so that the little red spot could be seen, so
a bullet hole would be easy to see, if it were there. The exact position
of the bullet hole was given by Humes and Boswell, which differed, but
those spots were open and viewable in the photo I showed. Here it is
http://i318.photobucket.com/albums/mm433/JFKAUTOPSYPHOTOS/JFKcolor_boh_autopsy_photo.jpg
Go ahead, deny it again!
I don't need to deny anything. I have ALL the medical examiners who have seen the evidence on my side. Who do you have on your side? Oh, that's right. Paul O'Connor and Jerrol Custer.
It's not a matter of sides. They were told what to find in their AR.
So when WE look, we don't see what they describe because it's not there.
I have to take you admission of not bothering to look for the hole in the
BOH as tacit agreement that the bullet hole isn't there in the BOH, and
you were suckered and can't admit it for fear of loss of more ego!
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
And if that photo was used for medical examiners, then you have a
really serious problem in what you're willing to believe.
Somebody who believes the nonsense you do ought not be making disparaging
remarks about what others are willing to believe.
Ah, had enough of the truth, I see. Don't want to face it. There's no
bullet hole where one should be and you can't explain it.

Chris
bigdog
2018-07-20 16:23:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
How foolish can you get? I said nothing about when photos were taken.
From what I've seen of the autopsy photos that were 'leaked', they were
altered and I've proved it humorously many times.
Yes, it's very humorous whenever you think you have proved something.
Post by mainframetech
Showing altered photos
was not noticed by Wecht, so why would he notice anything like we're
talking about? And you'll have to explain to me how that ties in with the
casket switching.
So your only explanation for why all those highly qualified medical
examiners could not see the body alterations is they just didn't notice
them. That's what I mean by humorous.
WRONG again! You are completely unable to guess what I'm thinking,
You're right. That remains one of the great mysteries of our time.
Post by mainframetech
which has been shown over the time you have tried. I did NOT say the only
reason is that they didn't notice them. I said that they were limited in
what they were allowed to see.
How do you know that? Oh, that's right. They don't agree with your
assessment so OBVIOUSLY they must not have seen all the evidence. There
couldn't be any other explanation. It couldn't be because they know what
they are talking about and you don't.
Post by mainframetech
They were allowed to see only what gave
the impression that there was a shooter above and behind JFK who caused
the death.
I guess that's your excuse for why people far more qualified than you
reached a conclusion that you don't want to accept.
WRONG as usual. I accept evidence and I've seen it in this case.
Your layman's opinions about autopsy results are not evidence. Opinions of
qualified experts are evidence. You seem to think that the definition of
evidence is something that sounds good to you.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
You were told by the WCR that there was a shot to the BOH that caused
death, but when I show you a photo of the BOH, you can't find the bullet
hole.
I don't have to find it. Every qualified medical examiner who saw ALL the
photos and x-rays found it and all agreed it was an entrance wound. I
would be pretty stupid to look at one photo and pretend I know more than
they do.
There you go! Proving my point! You can't see any evidence, but
you'll believe what you're told even though they can't see the evidence
either. They can only see the AR, which tells them what to think as to
the cause of death. The real cause is overlooked. Maybe intentionally.
Yes, I believe what the review panels tell me because they got to see far
more of the medical evidence than I have and they know so much more about
forensic medicine than I do. I would have to be a complete moron to ignore
their findings in favor or what I concluded by looking at a few photos. To
reject their findings I would have to believe that every member of those
review panels was either completely incompetent or in cahoots with a cover
up. I'm not sure which of those two choices is the more ridiculous.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The strange denial you suffer is to ignore the evidence of your own
eyes! And don't try to escape by saying the photo was not clear enough.
It was plenty clear, so much so that the little red spot could be seen, so
a bullet hole would be easy to see, if it were there. The exact position
of the bullet hole was given by Humes and Boswell, which differed, but
those spots were open and viewable in the photo I showed. Here it is
http://i318.photobucket.com/albums/mm433/JFKAUTOPSYPHOTOS/JFKcolor_boh_autopsy_photo.jpg
Go ahead, deny it again!
I don't need to deny anything. I have ALL the medical examiners who have seen the evidence on my side. Who do you have on your side? Oh, that's right. Paul O'Connor and Jerrol Custer.
It's not a matter of sides. They were told what to find in their AR.
Who told them that? What is your evidence that was done? Oh, I know. The
same evidence that the original autopsy team was ordered to falsify the
AR. The review panels findings don't fit with your theories so the only
possible explanation for that is they were ordered to accept the original
findings.
Post by mainframetech
So when WE look, we don't see what they describe because it's not there.
I have to take you admission of not bothering to look for the hole in the
BOH as tacit agreement that the bullet hole isn't there in the BOH, and
you were suckered and can't admit it for fear of loss of more ego!
Why doesn't your massive blowout in the BOH show up in that photo? You
can't believe that a small entry wound could be hidden but have not
trouble believing there was a gaping hole in the BOH that doesn't show up
in that photo.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
And if that photo was used for medical examiners, then you have a
really serious problem in what you're willing to believe.
Somebody who believes the nonsense you do ought not be making disparaging
remarks about what others are willing to believe.
Ah, had enough of the truth, I see. Don't want to face it. There's no
bullet hole where one should be and you can't explain it.
There's no gaping hole in the BOH. How do you explain that one?
mainframetech
2018-07-22 18:35:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
How foolish can you get? I said nothing about when photos were taken.
From what I've seen of the autopsy photos that were 'leaked', they were
altered and I've proved it humorously many times.
Yes, it's very humorous whenever you think you have proved something.
Post by mainframetech
Showing altered photos
was not noticed by Wecht, so why would he notice anything like we're
talking about? And you'll have to explain to me how that ties in with the
casket switching.
So your only explanation for why all those highly qualified medical
examiners could not see the body alterations is they just didn't notice
them. That's what I mean by humorous.
WRONG again! You are completely unable to guess what I'm thinking,
You're right. That remains one of the great mysteries of our time.
Post by mainframetech
which has been shown over the time you have tried. I did NOT say the only
reason is that they didn't notice them. I said that they were limited in
what they were allowed to see.
How do you know that? Oh, that's right. They don't agree with your
assessment so OBVIOUSLY they must not have seen all the evidence. There
couldn't be any other explanation. It couldn't be because they know what
they are talking about and you don't.
Post by mainframetech
They were allowed to see only what gave
the impression that there was a shooter above and behind JFK who caused
the death.
I guess that's your excuse for why people far more qualified than you
reached a conclusion that you don't want to accept.
WRONG as usual. I accept evidence and I've seen it in this case.
Your layman's opinions about autopsy results are not evidence. Opinions of
qualified experts are evidence. You seem to think that the definition of
evidence is something that sounds good to you.
WRONG! How dumb can people get? I do not depend on my opinions as you
do. I depend on evidence, and I've got it from those who participated in
various events and can speak about them. What I know about the JFK
autopsy comes form eyewitnesses that were there and saw what was in front
of them.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
You were told by the WCR that there was a shot to the BOH that caused
death, but when I show you a photo of the BOH, you can't find the bullet
hole.
I don't have to find it. Every qualified medical examiner who saw ALL the
photos and x-rays found it and all agreed it was an entrance wound. I
would be pretty stupid to look at one photo and pretend I know more than
they do.
There you go! Proving my point! You can't see any evidence, but
you'll believe what you're told even though they can't see the evidence
either. They can only see the AR, which tells them what to think as to
the cause of death. The real cause is overlooked. Maybe intentionally.
Yes, I believe what the review panels tell me because they got to see far
more of the medical evidence than I have and they know so much more about
forensic medicine than I do. I would have to be a complete moron to ignore
their findings in favor or what I concluded by looking at a few photos. To
reject their findings I would have to believe that every member of those
review panels was either completely incompetent or in cahoots with a cover
up. I'm not sure which of those two choices is the more ridiculous.
Of course, the moron is the one who doesn't consider fakery in a case
like this, and allows themselves to be hoodwinked by anyone that sounds
like authority.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The strange denial you suffer is to ignore the evidence of your own
eyes! And don't try to escape by saying the photo was not clear enough.
It was plenty clear, so much so that the little red spot could be seen, so
a bullet hole would be easy to see, if it were there. The exact position
of the bullet hole was given by Humes and Boswell, which differed, but
those spots were open and viewable in the photo I showed. Here it is
http://i318.photobucket.com/albums/mm433/JFKAUTOPSYPHOTOS/JFKcolor_boh_autopsy_photo.jpg
Go ahead, deny it again!
I don't need to deny anything. I have ALL the medical examiners who have seen the evidence on my side. Who do you have on your side? Oh, that's right. Paul O'Connor and Jerrol Custer.
It's not a matter of sides. They were told what to find in their AR.
Who told them that? What is your evidence that was done? Oh, I know. The
same evidence that the original autopsy team was ordered to falsify the
AR. The review panels findings don't fit with your theories so the only
possible explanation for that is they were ordered to accept the original
findings.
WRONG! I'm not suggesting that the panels were corrupt or falsified
results. The original pathologists were ordered to lie, and that was
shown to you. Others when assigned decided they were right and didn't
question the evidence they were shown too hard.

This has all been gone over time after time. It's to repetitive and I
know you like to do that, but it wears thin for me after a hundred times.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
So when WE look, we don't see what they describe because it's not there.
I have to take you admission of not bothering to look for the hole in the
BOH as tacit agreement that the bullet hole isn't there in the BOH, and
you were suckered and can't admit it for fear of loss of more ego!
Why doesn't your massive blowout in the BOH show up in that photo? You
can't believe that a small entry wound could be hidden but have not
trouble believing there was a gaping hole in the BOH that doesn't show up
in that photo.
I have no trouble believing that they altered the photo. I know they
did. But you didn't look at it from an overview. Either there was no
bullet hole in the BOH, or the re are altered photos shown to us, and
possibly the medical panels too. Which do you like? You have to pick
one.
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
And if that photo was used for medical examiners, then you have a
really serious problem in what you're willing to believe.
Somebody who believes the nonsense you do ought not be making disparaging
remarks about what others are willing to believe.
Ah, had enough of the truth, I see. Don't want to face it. There's no
bullet hole where one should be and you can't explain it.
There's no gaping hole in the BOH. How do you explain that one?
See above. I believe in altered photos. Which do you like? That
there's no bullet hole in the BOH, or that there are phony autopsy photos
being shown around?

Chris
bigdog
2018-07-23 13:52:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
How foolish can you get? I said nothing about when photos were taken.
From what I've seen of the autopsy photos that were 'leaked', they were
altered and I've proved it humorously many times.
Yes, it's very humorous whenever you think you have proved something.
Post by mainframetech
Showing altered photos
was not noticed by Wecht, so why would he notice anything like we're
talking about? And you'll have to explain to me how that ties in with the
casket switching.
So your only explanation for why all those highly qualified medical
examiners could not see the body alterations is they just didn't notice
them. That's what I mean by humorous.
WRONG again! You are completely unable to guess what I'm thinking,
You're right. That remains one of the great mysteries of our time.
Post by mainframetech
which has been shown over the time you have tried. I did NOT say the only
reason is that they didn't notice them. I said that they were limited in
what they were allowed to see.
How do you know that? Oh, that's right. They don't agree with your
assessment so OBVIOUSLY they must not have seen all the evidence. There
couldn't be any other explanation. It couldn't be because they know what
they are talking about and you don't.
Post by mainframetech
They were allowed to see only what gave
the impression that there was a shooter above and behind JFK who caused
the death.
I guess that's your excuse for why people far more qualified than you
reached a conclusion that you don't want to accept.
WRONG as usual. I accept evidence and I've seen it in this case.
Your layman's opinions about autopsy results are not evidence. Opinions of
qualified experts are evidence. You seem to think that the definition of
evidence is something that sounds good to you.
WRONG! How dumb can people get? I do not depend on my opinions as you
do. I depend on evidence, and I've got it from those who participated in
various events and can speak about them. What I know about the JFK
autopsy comes form eyewitnesses that were there and saw what was in front
of them.
You SELECT just a few of the people who were there and ignore everybody
else that was there. That might make sense if you selected the most
qualified people there but instead you selected the least qualified people
and dismissed people who were much more qualified. Your problem is the
bizarre way you weigh evidence. You invariably choose to put your faith in
the least reliable evidence available and dismiss everything else.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
You were told by the WCR that there was a shot to the BOH that caused
death, but when I show you a photo of the BOH, you can't find the bullet
hole.
I don't have to find it. Every qualified medical examiner who saw ALL the
photos and x-rays found it and all agreed it was an entrance wound. I
would be pretty stupid to look at one photo and pretend I know more than
they do.
There you go! Proving my point! You can't see any evidence, but
you'll believe what you're told even though they can't see the evidence
either. They can only see the AR, which tells them what to think as to
the cause of death. The real cause is overlooked. Maybe intentionally.
Yes, I believe what the review panels tell me because they got to see far
more of the medical evidence than I have and they know so much more about
forensic medicine than I do. I would have to be a complete moron to ignore
their findings in favor or what I concluded by looking at a few photos. To
reject their findings I would have to believe that every member of those
review panels was either completely incompetent or in cahoots with a cover
up. I'm not sure which of those two choices is the more ridiculous.
Of course, the moron is the one who doesn't consider fakery in a case
like this, and allows themselves to be hoodwinked by anyone that sounds
like authority.
The fakery is imaginary.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
The strange denial you suffer is to ignore the evidence of your own
eyes! And don't try to escape by saying the photo was not clear enough.
It was plenty clear, so much so that the little red spot could be seen, so
a bullet hole would be easy to see, if it were there. The exact position
of the bullet hole was given by Humes and Boswell, which differed, but
those spots were open and viewable in the photo I showed. Here it is
http://i318.photobucket.com/albums/mm433/JFKAUTOPSYPHOTOS/JFKcolor_boh_autopsy_photo.jpg
Go ahead, deny it again!
I don't need to deny anything. I have ALL the medical examiners who have seen the evidence on my side. Who do you have on your side? Oh, that's right. Paul O'Connor and Jerrol Custer.
It's not a matter of sides. They were told what to find in their AR.
Who told them that? What is your evidence that was done? Oh, I know. The
same evidence that the original autopsy team was ordered to falsify the
AR. The review panels findings don't fit with your theories so the only
possible explanation for that is they were ordered to accept the original
findings.
WRONG! I'm not suggesting that the panels were corrupt or falsified
results. The original pathologists were ordered to lie, and that was
shown to you. Others when assigned decided they were right and didn't
question the evidence they were shown too hard.
If the review panels simply rubberstamped the AR without bothering to look
at the evidence, they would have indeed been either incompetent or part of
the cover up. Both of those possibilities are ludicrous.
Post by mainframetech
This has all been gone over time after time. It's to repetitive and I
know you like to do that, but it wears thin for me after a hundred times.
I guess you would like to post this nonsense hundreds of times and not
have anybody point out how nonsensical it is.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
So when WE look, we don't see what they describe because it's not there.
I have to take you admission of not bothering to look for the hole in the
BOH as tacit agreement that the bullet hole isn't there in the BOH, and
you were suckered and can't admit it for fear of loss of more ego!
Why doesn't your massive blowout in the BOH show up in that photo? You
can't believe that a small entry wound could be hidden but have not
trouble believing there was a gaping hole in the BOH that doesn't show up
in that photo.
I have no trouble believing that they altered the photo. I know they
did. But you didn't look at it from an overview. Either there was no
bullet hole in the BOH, or the re are altered photos shown to us, and
possibly the medical panels too. Which do you like? You have to pick
one.
There is one other possibility. You are talking out your ass.
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
And if that photo was used for medical examiners, then you have a
really serious problem in what you're willing to believe.
Somebody who believes the nonsense you do ought not be making disparaging
remarks about what others are willing to believe.
Ah, had enough of the truth, I see. Don't want to face it. There's no
bullet hole where one should be and you can't explain it.
There's no gaping hole in the BOH. How do you explain that one?
See above. I believe in altered photos. Which do you like? That
there's no bullet hole in the BOH, or that there are phony autopsy photos
being shown around?
Amazing that you think those are the only two possibilities.
mainframetech
2018-07-25 01:42:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
How foolish can you get? I said nothing about when photos were taken.
From what I've seen of the autopsy photos that were 'leaked', they were
altered and I've proved it humorously many times.
Yes, it's very humorous whenever you think you have proved something.
Post by mainframetech
Showing altered photos
was not noticed by Wecht, so why would he notice anything like we're
talking about? And you'll have to explain to me how that ties in with the
casket switching.
So your only explanation for why all those highly qualified medical
examiners could not see the body alterations is they just didn't notice
them. That's what I mean by humorous.
WRONG again! You are completely unable to guess what I'm thinking,
You're right. That remains one of the great mysteries of our time.
Post by mainframetech
which has been shown over the time you have tried. I did NOT say the only
reason is that they didn't notice them. I said that they were limited in
what they were allowed to see.
How do you know that? Oh, that's right. They don't agree with your
assessment so OBVIOUSLY they must not have seen all the evidence. There
couldn't be any other explanation. It couldn't be because they know what
they are talking about and you don't.
Post by mainframetech
They were allowed to see only what gave
the impression that there was a shooter above and behind JFK who caused
the death.
I guess that's your excuse for why people far more qualified than you
reached a conclusion that you don't want to accept.
WRONG as usual. I accept evidence and I've seen it in this case.
Your layman's opinions about autopsy results are not evidence. Opinions of
qualified experts are evidence. You seem to think that the definition of
evidence is something that sounds good to you.
WRONG! How dumb can people get? I do not depend on my opinions as you
do. I depend on evidence, and I've got it from those who participated in
various events and can speak about them. What I know about the JFK
autopsy comes form eyewitnesses that were there and saw what was in front
of them.
You SELECT just a few of the people who were there and ignore everybody
else that was there. That might make sense if you selected the most
qualified people there but instead you selected the least qualified people
and dismissed people who were much more qualified. Your problem is the
bizarre way you weigh evidence. You invariably choose to put your faith in
the least reliable evidence available and dismiss everything else.
WRONG again! The AR was shown to be false, so those that contributed
to it couldn't be good witnesses. But those that did NOT contribute did
see things that would explain better about the silly SBT and why it was
ridiculous, which is what everyone thought when they first heard of it.
But like other false stories, told often enough and people begin to
believe it. This swamp post is full of repetitive junk, so I'm outa here.

Chris
Jason Burke
2018-07-25 17:14:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
How foolish can you get? I said nothing about when photos were taken.
From what I've seen of the autopsy photos that were 'leaked', they were
altered and I've proved it humorously many times.
Yes, it's very humorous whenever you think you have proved something.
Post by mainframetech
Showing altered photos
was not noticed by Wecht, so why would he notice anything like we're
talking about? And you'll have to explain to me how that ties in with the
casket switching.
So your only explanation for why all those highly qualified medical
examiners could not see the body alterations is they just didn't notice
them. That's what I mean by humorous.
WRONG again! You are completely unable to guess what I'm thinking,
You're right. That remains one of the great mysteries of our time.
Post by mainframetech
which has been shown over the time you have tried. I did NOT say the only
reason is that they didn't notice them. I said that they were limited in
what they were allowed to see.
How do you know that? Oh, that's right. They don't agree with your
assessment so OBVIOUSLY they must not have seen all the evidence. There
couldn't be any other explanation. It couldn't be because they know what
they are talking about and you don't.
Post by mainframetech
They were allowed to see only what gave
the impression that there was a shooter above and behind JFK who caused
the death.
I guess that's your excuse for why people far more qualified than you
reached a conclusion that you don't want to accept.
WRONG as usual. I accept evidence and I've seen it in this case.
Your layman's opinions about autopsy results are not evidence. Opinions of
qualified experts are evidence. You seem to think that the definition of
evidence is something that sounds good to you.
WRONG! How dumb can people get? I do not depend on my opinions as you
do. I depend on evidence, and I've got it from those who participated in
various events and can speak about them. What I know about the JFK
autopsy comes form eyewitnesses that were there and saw what was in front
of them.
You SELECT just a few of the people who were there and ignore everybody
else that was there. That might make sense if you selected the most
qualified people there but instead you selected the least qualified people
and dismissed people who were much more qualified. Your problem is the
bizarre way you weigh evidence. You invariably choose to put your faith in
the least reliable evidence available and dismiss everything else.
WRONG again! The AR was shown to be false, so those that contributed
to it couldn't be good witnesses. But those that did NOT contribute did
see things that would explain better about the silly SBT and why it was
ridiculous, which is what everyone thought when they first heard of it.
But like other false stories, told often enough and people begin to
believe it. This swamp post is full of repetitive junk, so I'm outa here.
Chris
Doesn't this dude get tired of embarrassing himself?
bigdog
2018-07-26 01:47:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
By taking all those photos AFTER the clandestine surgery, it would prove
that the surgery had been done on the body. Any competent medical examiner
would spot it in an instant. That is an opinion expressed by Dr. Cyril
Wecht which is the reason he knows that the Lifton/Horne body snatching
theory is ludicrous. You are advocating for a theory in which the plotters
had the body altered and then took lots of photos and x-rays to prove it
was done.
How foolish can you get? I said nothing about when photos were taken.
From what I've seen of the autopsy photos that were 'leaked', they were
altered and I've proved it humorously many times.
Yes, it's very humorous whenever you think you have proved something.
Post by mainframetech
Showing altered photos
was not noticed by Wecht, so why would he notice anything like we're
talking about? And you'll have to explain to me how that ties in with the
casket switching.
So your only explanation for why all those highly qualified medical
examiners could not see the body alterations is they just didn't notice
them. That's what I mean by humorous.
WRONG again! You are completely unable to guess what I'm thinking,
You're right. That remains one of the great mysteries of our time.
Post by mainframetech
which has been shown over the time you have tried. I did NOT say the only
reason is that they didn't notice them. I said that they were limited in
what they were allowed to see.
How do you know that? Oh, that's right. They don't agree with your
assessment so OBVIOUSLY they must not have seen all the evidence. There
couldn't be any other explanation. It couldn't be because they know what
they are talking about and you don't.
Post by mainframetech
They were allowed to see only what gave
the impression that there was a shooter above and behind JFK who caused
the death.
I guess that's your excuse for why people far more qualified than you
reached a conclusion that you don't want to accept.
WRONG as usual. I accept evidence and I've seen it in this case.
Your layman's opinions about autopsy results are not evidence. Opinions of
qualified experts are evidence. You seem to think that the definition of
evidence is something that sounds good to you.
WRONG! How dumb can people get? I do not depend on my opinions as you
do. I depend on evidence, and I've got it from those who participated in
various events and can speak about them. What I know about the JFK
autopsy comes form eyewitnesses that were there and saw what was in front
of them.
You SELECT just a few of the people who were there and ignore everybody
else that was there. That might make sense if you selected the most
qualified people there but instead you selected the least qualified people
and dismissed people who were much more qualified. Your problem is the
bizarre way you weigh evidence. You invariably choose to put your faith in
the least reliable evidence available and dismiss everything else.
WRONG again! The AR was shown to be false, so those that contributed
to it couldn't be good witnesses.
Amazing how in another thread you were singing the praises of Humes
regarding his HSCA testimony.
Post by mainframetech
But those that did NOT contribute did
see things that would explain better about the silly SBT and why it was
ridiculous,
They don't explain things better. They explain things to your liking.
That's all that matters to you.
Post by mainframetech
which is what everyone thought when they first heard of it.
But like other false stories, told often enough and people begin to
believe it.
That pretty much sums up why conspiracy theories have gained so much
traction.

Anthony Marsh
2018-07-13 18:37:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by mainframetech
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
As usual you're not thinking! With an autopsy like this on the POTUS,
a rarity, there would be many photos taken, as is often done during
autopsies from crimes, and there would be years of arguing and fighting
over possible conspiracies, and they need the backup to prove what they
say when they blamed Oswald and ONLY Oswald. Then after needing all that
proof, they had to FIX the proof so that it matched the scenario they were
selling. If it were all done quietly off to the side, then there would be
suspicions that would never rest.
Chris
Well, it helped when they hid the sutopsy phhotos from the public. Then
they could lie about the wounds and make up false drawings and no one
would know the difference.
claviger
2018-07-14 03:47:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Marsh
Well, it helped when they hid the sutopsy phhotos from the public. Then
they could lie about the wounds and make up false drawings and no one
would know the difference.
Who is they? The SSA took control of the photos and X-rays.
Anthony Marsh
2018-07-14 23:47:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by claviger
Post by Anthony Marsh
Well, it helped when they hid the sutopsy phhotos from the public. Then
they could lie about the wounds and make up false drawings and no one
would know the difference.
Who is they? The SSA took control of the photos and X-rays.
The GOVERNMENT. The Warren Commission.

The SS did not make up drawings.
Anthony Marsh
2018-07-13 14:47:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigdog
A question has occurred to me that I probably should have thought of a
long time ago. If the plotters had Humes, Boswell, Finck and their
military supervisors on board with the cover up, why would they bother
going to all the trouble of playing musical caskets with JFK's body and
doing all that clandestine surgery to make it look like all the shots came
from behind? Why not just close the autopsy to those three men and their
supervisors and simply have them falsify the report? It would accomplish
the same thing with a lot less hassle and a lot less risk of exposure.
JFK's body would be planted in the ground within a few days and no one
would be any the wiser.
You're posting in the wrong newsgroup.
You are allowed to ask common sense questions like that here.
Try the Nuthouse.
Loading...