JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS
JOHN A. CANAL SAID:
>>> "Let me clue you in--both Vincent Bugliosi's and John McAdams' positions are outdated." <<<
DAVID R. VON PEIN SAID:
LOL. That's rich and high-caloric, to say the least, John.
I wonder how these two items below can become "outdated"?:
There is not and never was a large-sized wound/defect in the right-rear of JFK's head. It simply does not exist, and never did. And the above two pictures verify that fact FOR ALL TIME.
"There was no defect or wound to the rear of Kennedy's head other than the entrance wound in the upper right part of the head." -- DR. MICHAEL BADEN; JANUARY 2000
But, John Canal thinks he can sprinkle a little sage here....a little thyme there....and a little B.S. for extra spice in the BOH...and Voila!--a magic hole suddenly appears in the back of JFK's head, even though the above two photos don't show a single solitary sign of Canal's large BOH wound.
Plus, those two photos above also do one additional thing that no "spicing" up of the evidence can do:
THEY CORROBORATE EACH OTHER (one X-ray and one autopsy photo). They corroborate, in tandem, the NON-EXISTENCE of John Canal's (and every CTers') make-believe "BOH" wound in President John F. Kennedy's head.
"Outdated" autopsy photographs and X-rays indeed?? I love that one.
Tell me again, John, how an official ("unaltered") autopsy photo and an official ("unaltered") autopsy X-ray managed to become "outdated" since nineteen hundred and sixty-three. I want to hear that argument again....if only for the belly laugh.
David Von Pein
July 20, 2008
Posted By: David Von Pein