BORIS SAID:
Why don't you go with the new excuse that "occipital" was placed in the AR [Autopsy Report] by mistake?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Actually, given the photographic evidence in this case, such a "mistake" is quite possible, IMO, as I discussed at various forums four years ago (below)....
jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1045.html#Occipital-Vs-Frontal
BORIS SAID:
And tell us, how many times did "occipital" or "occiput" appear in the AR? Each one a mistake, was it?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
As it relates to the point being discussed here (i.e., the location of the EXIT WOUND in President Kennedy's head), the word "Occipital" appears a grand total of ONE time in the Official Autopsy Report (on Page 3 of that report, which is the controversial "somewhat into the occipital" passage).
And given the obvious fact that the autopsy photos and X-rays show that the "Frontal" portion of JFK's head most certainly WAS affected by the fatal bullet....coupled with the fact that (incredibly) the words "Frontal" and/or "Frontal Bone" do not appear even ONE time in said autopsy report....it's not a wild theory at all (IMO) to conclude that—just perhaps—that ONE single reference to "Occipital" (as it relates specifically to just the large exit wound in JFK's cranium) could very well be an unintentional error made by the autopsy surgeons—despite the fact that all three of those doctors (Humes, Finck, and Boswell) each affixed their individual signatures to said AR document.
BORIS SAID:
Asshole, it's "controversial" only to you and your moron McAdams friends. It's perfectly explicable to the rest of us, and to every single witness who testified to seeing the back of his head.
LN imbeciles like to speak of "occipital" like it was a typo or something. As if it appeared in the middle of a sentence without any context at all.
Is this the new tactic?
And **every** instance of its utterance is relevant.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
But, as I just said above, we're only talking in THIS discussion about ONE single reference to the word "Occipital" --- only as it relates to Kennedy's large exit wound.
Do I need to emphasize that fact for a third time?
Read this AR paragraph....
"There is a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions."
....and then watch this video (at 4:50)....
....and then gaze upon these photos....
....and then try to explain to me how it was possible for Dr. Humes to NOT conclude in the AR that the blown-out area of Kennedy's head had also affected the FRONTAL region of his head?
In a word---Impossible.
BORIS SAID:
Careful, you almost used "occipital" and "exit wound" in the same sentence.
Dipshit, do you think I haven't seen the BOH photo and lead snowstorm X-ray before? The latter is literally a smoking gun.
The former is what you build your argument around, rather than building an argument first and then using it to fortify your position.
You can try to explain to us why the BOH photo matches what *none* of the witnesses saw. Or you can try to explain why that photo has been disclaimed by John Stringer and Floyd Riebe. Or you can do the chickenshit shuffle and demand I produce all the explanations instead, just like the other lowly skidmarks in this forum.
Von Pissant continues to treat "occipital" as a throwaway word with no meaning, much like he does with "parietal" and "falx cerebri". And he continues to pursue the fallacious logic that "if a wound in the front, therefore none in the back."
Much like your cut-rate website with its '90s flash, your faith needs a serious update.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
CTers are nothing but hypocrites when it comes to any discussion about JFK's autopsy report. Most Internet conspiracy theorists just love the "Somewhat into the occipital" reference, but they can't stand these conclusions from the VERY SAME autopsy report....
"It is our opinion that the deceased died as a result of two perforating gunshot wounds inflicted by high velocity projectiles fired by a person or persons unknown. The projectiles were fired from a point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased."
and....
"The fatal missile entered the skull above and to the right of the external occipital protuberance."
and....
"The other missile...made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck."
CTers think that all three of the above conclusions are nothing but total lies invented by the autopsy physicians.
CTers = Hypocrites Of The First Order.
Bask in it.
BORIS SAID:
I bask in the fire Humes built in his living room, scumbag.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
And you know perfectly well WHY Humes started that fire, but, like all scumbag CTers, you'll totally ignore Humes' perfectly reasonable (and proper) reason for doing it.
BEN HOLMES SAID:
As the original poster of this thread, I can assure you that you're telling an intentional lie.
The topic is the blatant lie told about the *LARGE* wound in JFK's head... and its proper location.
It's now **YOU** who've characterized it as an "exit" wound.
That was a rather stupid mistake... because you cannot maintain or prove that the **EXIT** wound was not in the occipital/parietal ... which is in the BACK of JFK's head.
And the fact that an *EXIT* wound was located in the BACK of JFK's head will lead honest people to either agree with Dr. Humes' claim that "Scientifically, sir, it is impossible for it to have been fired from other than behind. Or to have exited from other than behind." ... or to draw the reasonable conclusion that JFK was hit from the front.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Even a top-flight idiot like Benjamin Holmes should be able to figure out what Humes meant by his double "From Behind" remark. But Ben apparently can't do it---so I'll give him the answer (and don't forget about the "Addendum" on this subject I just added today, which is the most important part of all)....
Here's the "Addendum" I referred to above:
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
It's also very important to evaluate Dr. Humes' "From Behind" remarks based on the context of the question he was being asked to answer at the time, which was this question put to Dr. Humes by Allen Dulles of the Warren Commission:
"Am I correct in assuming from what you have said that this wound is entirely inconsistent with a wound that might have been administered if the shot were fired from in front or the side of the President? It had to be fired from behind the President?"
The above question by Dulles was immediately followed by this response by Dr. James Humes:
"Scientifically, sir, it is impossible for it to have been fired from other than behind. Or to have exited from other than behind."
Therefore, as everyone can easily see, the context of Humes' "From Behind" answer makes it perfectly clear that Humes' response to Dulles' question was an effort on Humes' part to convey the fact that—in Dr. Humes' professional medical opinion—President Kennedy's assassin could only have been located "behind" the President when he was shot on November 22, 1963.
DAVID G. HEALY SAID:
Quoting yourself again Davey?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
When I feel it's appropriate, yes.
DAVID G. HEALY SAID:
What a wimp.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Have you had the pleasure of being tased on "Live PD" yet, Mr. Junkie? I'll be lookin' for ya on the next episode.
BORIS SAID:
This is what a "researcher" has been reduced to.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Well, sometimes that slow pitch right down the middle is just too difficult to resist. (I'm sure Healy understands my position on this after so many years of being the type of vile and disgusting online person he's been since at least 2006.)
Would you like me to list the recent insults and vulgar remarks uttered by somebody calling himself "Boris"? (It'll take a while to catalog all of them, though, since they are abundant in quantity.)
So, like I said, CTers = Hypocrites.
BTW, I've never once claimed to be a "researcher", and I never will.
BEN HOLMES SAID:
The *ALLEGED* reason [Dr. Humes burned his notes] was blood.
Did he burn everything that had blood on it?
And [were] his hands still bloody the following day when he wrote his first draft? (which was also burned.)
Watch as David runs from these facts.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Super Stump strikes again!
BORIS SAID:
Someone "schooled" enough to write a book on the subject has been reduced to this worthless shit of an answer, and it took nothing but a couple of short posts by Ben, and a half-assed effort by me yesterday, as I minimized this forum screen in the background while I worked. You had less than HALF my attention. And barely any at all of Ben's.
And that's all it took to reduce a JFK "scholar" to nothing.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I kept that post short & sweet, and also did Benji a favor by trying to save him the embarrassment of having to explain WHY James Humes decided to TELL THE WORLD that he had burned some autopsy materials in his home fireplace when the good doctor most certainly didn't HAVE to do that (and, quite obviously, wouldn't have done that if he had been the worthless lying SOB that Benjamin Stump thinks he was in 1963).
Go back to giving me half of your glorious attention, Mr. Boris Clown. (Or, hopefully, much less than half.)
David Von Pein
July 23-24, 2019
