JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Greg [Burnham]:
Thanks a lot for this [post].
It's really neat that Dave [Mantik] got another doctor to go along with his compelling evidence on the x rays.
I have always thought that if we ever got a TV special on the ARRB, Mantik's stuff on this subject would be mandatory to be included. Because it is pretty easy to understand yet it's scientifically based. Plus it's visual.
[...]
BTW, if you don't mind a bit of editorializing, I think I have earned the right....
One thing that really bothers me of late about this so called critical community is this:
It's not very critical.
Greg [Burnham] posts on here one piece of very interesting evidence, and three people then jump on to say that now we know who killed Kennedy!
I mean, please. That is ridiculous.
The argument about who killed Kennedy cannot be made like that, i.e. on one piece of evidence in a post on a forum. It's kind of silly if you ask me.
But ever since the nineties, the critical community has been plagued with this unsophisticated trait. If I had to put a marker on it, it began when that blowhard Barr McClellan brought out his LBJ did it book for the 40th. And then the two other blowhards, Nigel Turner and Alex Jones, featured him on their shows. Well, I was one of the people who actually read that book, and took notes on it. It is really one of the worst books written on the case. The one piece of evidence the book had, the so called Wallace print, has now been called into question.
To me, the only way this case will be solved is INDUCTIVELY! Not deductively--that is having your pet theory and then jumping onto something to gird it. That is Lamar Waldron/ Barr McClellan disease.
As I noted above, Mantik's work is really interesting and it's good that he got someone to go along with him. But to say it solves the case--and that we know who killed JFK?
C'mon. We will never be taken seriously it we continue to do this stuff. We will (rightly) be perceived as a bunch of jejune axe grinders.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Well, Jim, let's face it....
Why on Earth would anyone in their right mind ever take you "seriously" when you endorse untenable junk like THIS?
I'd be more inclined to believe that the moon is made out of peanut butter and jelly than to believe in any of the preposterous things you believe in regarding the JFK assassination, Jimbo.
DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:
Re: the silly "White Blob Added To The X-Ray" theory....
[Quoting John McAdams:]
"Mantik is the fellow who found a "suspicious" white blob over the back of Kennedy's skull in the lateral X-rays. He sees this as evidence of conspiracy, but he's never dealt with the fact that the HSCA published these x-rays in the 70s and there was no such blob then. The x-rays showed the back of Kennedy's head intact. Why would the Evil Minions tamper with evidence that SHOWED WHAT THEY WANTED IT TO SHOW?" -- John McAdams; December 22, 1999
More common sense from McAdams....
MICHAEL T. GRIFFITH SAID:
You [John McAdams] are forgetting that Dr. Mantik observed and measured--yes, measured--the unnatural white patch ON THE X-RAYS AT THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES.
You're also forgetting that the condition of the posterior of the skull in the AP x-ray was largely ignored by the HSCA's forensic pathology panel.
JOHN McADAMS THEN SAID:
No, it was not. They quite clearly stated that the entry defect was in the cowlick area, and that this entry point was on the margin of the large wound. You might look at [what] the x-ray experts of the HSCA said about this:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/xray/hsca/hsca.htm
The Ramsey Clark Panel saw the x-rays. They found the back of the head intact.
The HSCA FPP saw the x-rays, and they found the back of the head intact.
So in the late 60s and then in the late 70s, the x-rays showed "what the plotters wanted to show."
Why did they mess with them between the late 1970s and the time that Mantik got ahold of them?
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
It's not a point of whether or not the back of the head is intact.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Huh? It's not??! You must be joking.
OF COURSE that's what it's all about, Jim. That's the ENTIRE genesis for the "White Blob" X-ray debate! Otherwise, this whole topic about the X-rays is a complete non-issue.
Dr. Mantik thinks that President Kennedy had a huge hole in the back of his head and that's why somebody (allegedly) tampered with the X-rays.
Why ELSE would the forever-unidentified and unknown "they" be monkeying around with the X-rays? Just for kicks?
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
You know, I always said you had problems with the English language.
And this is one reason I do not deal with you anymore [EVEN THOUGH JIMMY IS "DEALING" WITH ME RIGHT NOW, AND DEALT WITH ME NUMEROUS TIMES RECENTLY IN THIS "MONEY ORDER" DISCUSSION TOO; GO FIGURE HYPOCRITES; ~shrug~].
The point of the issue is not whether the x rays show an intact skull.
What Mantik is arguing is that the rear of the skull appears to be overexposed which is where a white patch appears. And it obstructs that so you cannot decipher what is back there.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
And, as I said before, the ONLY possible reason for anyone to have wanted to add a "white blob" or a "white patch" to the X-ray would be to fake the X-ray to make it look like the back of the President's head was intact (i.e., with no missing bone).
Therefore, the bottom-line issue about this matter IS, indeed, "whether the
x rays show an intact skull".
If that's NOT the "issue", then for Pete sake, what is?
You think Mantik believes that somebody faked an X-ray that already showed an intact back of the head?
That's really crazy, Jimmy. (Even for you.)
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
See how long it is before I deal with you directly again.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Oh, the horror! I'm back on Ignore. I'll surely be committing hari-kari now!
Geesh. What an ego.
David Von Pein
December 9-10, 2015
