Interestingly, the Surgeon(Robert McClelland ) who tried to save both JFk and Oswald's life died a few months ago, his obituary in the economist is an interesting read:
> The neck wound might have been entry or exit, but the back of the head clearly showed a huge exit wound; so the first bullet probably came from the back, and the second from the front, from different gunmen.
also from the same article:
>Several other aspects went on troubling him. There was no post-mortem in Texas, against state law; the body went at
once to Bethesda. He was shown autopsy pictures at the National Archives in which the exit wound was covered up.
He gets shot in the neck, it appears to exit the front of his neck and enter the backside of the guy in the front seat (I think the governor).
He then gets the front of his head blown off, which definitely looks to be an exit wound as the front of his skull flies off and mist flies forward. An entry wound would not explode out like that. The thing that throws people off is that his head moves back when the front blows off. I think that would be a natural movement from the force of the bullet exiting and blowing off the front of the skull but you also have to remember that he had a terrible back with limited mobility. As a person who also has a bad back, if you get pushed forward to the fullest of your flexibility, you will recoil back with force.
I was raised to believe in multiple shooters but I don’t see it here. One shooter.
Agreed. Not sure why you are getting downvoted. Concluding that there was a second shooter is like saying that "your runny nose and sore throat are definitely caused by the flu, but the dry cough could be either flu or lung cancer, so you probably have both".
That conclusion doesn't follow from the stated premises. The most basic missing premise is that Oswald was positioned (inside the book depository) behind the motorcade. See https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/DealeyPl... Of course, there are many other necessary premises wherein lie the interminable debate. But if you assume (as it seems the doctor did) that at least one shot (possibly a miss) came from Oswald behind the president, who was facing forward; and one shot came from ahead of the president exiting the back of his head, the scenario the doctor believed the evidence demanded; then you must conclude at least two shooters.
Yeah, and Oswald shot perfect shots with a super old WW2 rifle in less than 10s while he was an average shooter at best based on what we know from him in the army. There's enough evidence at this stage to support several shooters despite what the History books claim.
If there were two shooters, wouldn't they have to be incredibly coordinated to shoot directly on target at pretty much the same time? Seems pretty difficult to get two shots to the head/neck from long range in the time between the first shot and the car pulling away.
Trauma Room One still exists. At least it did several years ago. I went to Parkland for a CT scan (my wife is a doctor there) and in this rather bustling, fairly mundane room, there was a modest plaque, identifying the room as Trauma Room One. Kind of an interesting feeling to be there.
A few years ago, Parkland built a huge new hospital across the street, and I doubt that that room is still in use. But I could be wrong,
The way they didn't realize Bartlet was shot until he started to bleed from the mouth was copied straight from what happened to Reagan.
During the West Wing, Sorkin was a master at dramatizing real life when it worked, or inventing plot points completely when that would play better.
Like Christan Slater destroying his $1400 glass ash tray with a hammer to demonstrate that it's expensive because it's designed to break in to dull pieces and thereby not be dangerous in the heat of naval combat, justifying the cost. Except in real life they'd just use one made of metal.
That so much of it was authentic (to a television standard) gave suspension of disbelief for the made up bits, and seasons 1-4 are consequently some of the best television ever made.
> There's something else: One my best friends growing up in Dallas was named Henry Zapruder. His father was Abraham Zapruder [the Dallas dressmaker who shot the famous film of the assassination.] I knew the Zapruders very well, and had been in their home many times.
What are the odds of that. Maybe we need something like the Erdős-Number, but for the JFK assasination.
Also, given the fact that one was using a video camera (a very expensive hobby back then) and one was a medical student, they were more likely to travel in the same social circles and be closely connected than the average pair of people living in Dallas.
> This was supposedly due to Dr. Tom Shires, the chief of surgery, popularizing the use of intravenous fluids acutely rather than blood transfusions.
I find that comment interesting since current state of the art in trauma resuscitation is transfusing relatively early, based on solid data out of the Iraq war.
A Cruel and Shocking Act: The Secret History of the Kennedy Assassination doesn't really get to the bottom of it, but it's a great book about the Kennedy assassination, and contains new information (including evidence that Oswald had a CIA handler in Mexico City.)
A few years ago, when I was researching Michele Sindona and Propoganda Due, I stumbled upon a blog that talked extensively about the Kennedy case as well as the Bloomfield files. It also hinted about Montreal being the possible staging area for the assasination (as in Lincoln's case). Back in 2013 I managed to book an appointment to take a look at the Bloomfield files but dropped it because I'm not sure what I might find in the files (although I do believe that the most important parts have been well protected till today and won't be released to the public forever), as even the released docs look interesting (hint: involving Rothchild and Freemansonry).
I've never had more than a passing curiosity about the conspiracy rabbit hole that is the JFK assassination. When I saw recently though someone suggest the possibility that a Secret Service agent may have accidentally hit Kennedy I saw suddenly how that explanation seemed not only to put a lot of the puzzle pieces together (at least the more common quandaries you hear about) but seemed to me plausible as well.
Then again, with all things, it seems impossible they could have covered up something like that without someone leaking/talking.
Who are all these experts on exit/entrance wounds shot from 200 yards away? I did a deep dive into this conspiracy a while back and couldn't find anything of substance.
If I had to guess it's probably something relatively mundane but embarrassing for the various 3 letter agencies involved at the time.
If it was "The CIA shot JFK", regardless of improbability, it would have to be a moon-landing level cover up with the sheer number of people that have flowed through over the years (some of which have been traitors let's keep in mind, although I'm not sure many would've had the clearance to find out)
Yeah, that one regret must feel heavy sometimes. He could have changed history. It's absolutely not his fault and he did everything right, but... what if ?
The argument against "conspiracy theories" is often that no way could they keep it secret because so many people were involved, someone would have leaked it.
But now we are in a situation where much of the Republican party does not dare to speak against Trump no matter how ludicrous it seems when he says he won the election because the election was "rigged". If Biden had NOT won the election the general official consensus might be that Muller investigation was a hoax and anybody who disagrees is a conspiracy theorist.
History is written by the winners. I think many people have a somewhat naive assumption that "truth will always come out"-- and therefore if it has not come out it can only be a conspiracy theory.
> You didn't talk publicly about assisting in Trauma Room One until you appeared in the 1993 book JFK: Breaking the Silence. How come?
> Because I was afraid. There were so many people who were associated with the assassination who had died, sometimes by questionable means.
Could have something to do with the speech from April 27, 1961:
> For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day.
I will do my best to expose them. I am not an American, but I am against communists and fascists as Americans were back then. Stay vigilant! Vote with your ideals.
Joseph Kennedy was a bank owner (at least part owner) before WW I, and made a further pile in the stock market--getting out before the crash--and some I guess in movies. He bought up a bunch of distilleries, and he had booze stored under bond, but the notion that he was a bootlegger is wrong.
Was he more scrupulous than the next businessman? Maybe not.
Was he in bed with the mob? I doubt it.
Mobs have attempted to rig elections, but not I think The Mob. The most conspicuously rigged election in US history must have been Hayes over Tilden, at a time when organized crime was pretty small beans in the US.
"> For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day."
I don't know the rest of the speach, but it sounds to me, he meant the various marxist groups and states.
> The neck wound might have been entry or exit, but the back of the head clearly showed a huge exit wound; so the first bullet probably came from the back, and the second from the front, from different gunmen.
also from the same article:
>Several other aspects went on troubling him. There was no post-mortem in Texas, against state law; the body went at once to Bethesda. He was shown autopsy pictures at the National Archives in which the exit wound was covered up.
Article: https://beta.trimread.com/articles/52767
He gets shot in the neck, it appears to exit the front of his neck and enter the backside of the guy in the front seat (I think the governor).
He then gets the front of his head blown off, which definitely looks to be an exit wound as the front of his skull flies off and mist flies forward. An entry wound would not explode out like that. The thing that throws people off is that his head moves back when the front blows off. I think that would be a natural movement from the force of the bullet exiting and blowing off the front of the skull but you also have to remember that he had a terrible back with limited mobility. As a person who also has a bad back, if you get pushed forward to the fullest of your flexibility, you will recoil back with force.
I was raised to believe in multiple shooters but I don’t see it here. One shooter.
https://youtu.be/yzyw7AcHbuY
AFAIK sniper Swat teams do this when there are multiple targets. They coordinate through radio and shout on countdown.
Frankly I don't think it's complicated (for a pro).
I.e. create some confusion around an unimportant detail. Instead of who ordered Kennedy dead
A few years ago, Parkland built a huge new hospital across the street, and I doubt that that room is still in use. But I could be wrong,
During the West Wing, Sorkin was a master at dramatizing real life when it worked, or inventing plot points completely when that would play better.
Like Christan Slater destroying his $1400 glass ash tray with a hammer to demonstrate that it's expensive because it's designed to break in to dull pieces and thereby not be dangerous in the heat of naval combat, justifying the cost. Except in real life they'd just use one made of metal.
That so much of it was authentic (to a television standard) gave suspension of disbelief for the made up bits, and seasons 1-4 are consequently some of the best television ever made.
Masterful is the only word I can think to describe The West Wing. Masterful writing, acting, directing, etc...
It also happens to be one of the funniest shows. "WOOT CANAW!" "They won't let me smoke inside but you can pee in Leo's closet."
What are the odds of that. Maybe we need something like the Erdős-Number, but for the JFK assasination.
I find that comment interesting since current state of the art in trauma resuscitation is transfusing relatively early, based on solid data out of the Iraq war.
Well, I guess we will never get into the bottom of the story.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/book-review-a-cruel-...
After a bit of search I managed to find it again:
http://somesecretsforyou.blogspot.com/2010/04/why-bloomfield...
I've never had more than a passing curiosity about the conspiracy rabbit hole that is the JFK assassination. When I saw recently though someone suggest the possibility that a Secret Service agent may have accidentally hit Kennedy I saw suddenly how that explanation seemed not only to put a lot of the puzzle pieces together (at least the more common quandaries you hear about) but seemed to me plausible as well.
Then again, with all things, it seems impossible they could have covered up something like that without someone leaking/talking.
You haven't ever (!?) heard of 'leaking/talking'?
That's a huge rock you've been under, and a well-greased cannonball you've swallowed, my friend.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBz3PqA2Fmc
"Back, and to the left ..."
What the hell is being hidden?
If it was "The CIA shot JFK", regardless of improbability, it would have to be a moon-landing level cover up with the sheer number of people that have flowed through over the years (some of which have been traitors let's keep in mind, although I'm not sure many would've had the clearance to find out)
Mossad. Dimona.
An amazing story. Thanks to the poster.
But now we are in a situation where much of the Republican party does not dare to speak against Trump no matter how ludicrous it seems when he says he won the election because the election was "rigged". If Biden had NOT won the election the general official consensus might be that Muller investigation was a hoax and anybody who disagrees is a conspiracy theorist.
History is written by the winners. I think many people have a somewhat naive assumption that "truth will always come out"-- and therefore if it has not come out it can only be a conspiracy theory.
I mean... in some sense isn't that kind of the general consensus right now
> Because I was afraid. There were so many people who were associated with the assassination who had died, sometimes by questionable means.
Could have something to do with the speech from April 27, 1961:
> For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day.
I will do my best to expose them. I am not an American, but I am against communists and fascists as Americans were back then. Stay vigilant! Vote with your ideals.
Was he more scrupulous than the next businessman? Maybe not. Was he in bed with the mob? I doubt it.
Mobs have attempted to rig elections, but not I think The Mob. The most conspicuously rigged election in US history must have been Hayes over Tilden, at a time when organized crime was pretty small beans in the US.
I don't know the rest of the speach, but it sounds to me, he meant the various marxist groups and states.