Surgeon in ER insists 2 gunmen shot JFK

[deminks]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by rhett o rick (a host of the General Discussion forum).

By Michael A. Fuoco / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

A surgeon who half a century ago was among the doctors who tried to save President John F. Kennedy's life said Thursday that the Warren Commission got it wrong in determining a lone gunman assassinated JFK in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963.

Speaking via teleconference to a Duquesne University symposium marking the 50th anniversary of the assassination, Robert N. McClelland said he was the first doctor in Parkland Hospital's Trauma Room One to notice the massive wound in the back of Kennedy's skull and that a trauma of that size had to be an exit wound.

"The whole right side of his skull was gone. I could look inside his skull cavity. Obviously, it was a mortal wound," he told a spellbound audience of legal, medical, forensic and investigative experts and the public who packed the university's Power Ballroom.

Dr. McClelland, now 83 and professor emeritus at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, said that because it was an exit wound, it logically followed that it had been fired from in front of the president's limousine. And, in turn, that meant a second gunman was involved in the assassination, contradicting the Warren Commission's finding that there was but one assassin.

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/neighborhoods-city/surgeon-in-er-insists-2-gunmen-shot-jfk-708042/#ixzz2i5bmeGxY

[Junkdrawer]

1. What does a "professor emeritus at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center" know?

He only treated JFK first hand for 18 minutes. Gerald Posner wrote a whole book.

[blm]

2. Posner - BFEE made man. His schtick is to pose as a 'fairminded Democrat'

while he plays cover up for the boss - Poppy Bush.

[Junkdrawer]

3. Posner actually diagnosed Oswald as "Passive Agressive"....

[villager]

4. he was only a medically-trained eyewitness to the actual wound for 18 long minutes!?

Better to trust a corporate copy-churner like Posner, then!

[Junkdrawer]

5. Betcha he gets WAY more airtime in the coming 50 yr anniversary....

Case Closed

[villager]

7. You mean Posner, courtesy corporate media?

Yeah, that's an unfortunate possibility.

[Junkdrawer]

8. That's what happened at the 30 yr. anniversary....Check this from Michael Parenti:

THESE TWO PROGRAMS WERE CONSIDERED LOST
- I LOCATED COPIES OF THE MASTERS:

The JFK Assassination and the Gangster Nature of the State

When Oliver Stone’s movie JFK opened in December 1991 a huge PR campaign was mobilized against the film. Even progressives spoke out. Noam Chomsky wrote in support of the Warren Commission's findings – in contrast Michael Parenti gave one of his highly acclaimed talks criticizing the lone assassin theory. The bitter questions that haunted defenders and critics alike was whether government agencies of a democratic country would do such a thing as assassinate an elected President.

In this talk Michael Parenti turns to that question first – he examines, in part one, what he calls “the gangster nature of the state.” In part two he goes over details of the assassination and critiques The Nation, The Progressive, Chomsky and Cockburn. He spoke in Berkeley, CA, on the 30th anniversary of the JFK assassination. This is one of many "standing ovations" talks by Parenti. The master for this program was lost and this appears to be the only copy of the original recording.
For a broadcast quality mp3 version of Part ONE click HERE
For a broadcast quality mp3 version of Part TWO click HERE

http://www.tucradio.org/parenti.html#Parenti

[7962]

35. That makes him a forensics expert, too.

[joeybee12]

6. If he had treated JFK for 19 minutes, he'd have a point...but only 18?

Come on, that's just speculation!!!

[deutsey]

9. He and most of the medical team in Dallas have been saying this for years

You rarely, if ever, see them in mainstream documentaries about the assassination (at least I haven't seen them, anyway). They're in The Men Who Killed Kennedy, I think, and have been interviewed in many books.

I think their account of what they saw should at least be part of the public's knowledge of what happened that day. If it was, though, that would directly contradict the official autopsy photos that show the back of JFK's head intact.

[Festivito]

24. Intact, after Jackie collected that piece from over the trunk. eom.

[rollingsalmon]

25. Their lying eyes.......

The autopsy photos have always been suspect. The photo that shows the posterior of the President's head is full of gloved hands which could have been holding the intact SCALP over the blasted out cavity. I have personally talked to 3 of the doctors who actually worked on JFK, or in one case, took him out of the limo and put him on the gurney. All 3 say the right-rear of JFK's head was gone....not there. A large piece of the skull was found in the grass on the LEFT side of where the limo was at the time of the fatal shot.......directly in line with a shot from the Grassy Knoll.

The first hand witnesses, most of whom had extensive experience with gunshot wounds, should be the primary source of information. The doctors and the Zapruder Film leave little doubt that at least one shot, the fatal one, came from the right-front of the limo. The motorcycle cop at the left rear of the limo was coated in blood and brain matter. It's physics pure and simple. A shot from above and to the right rear would not have blown material all over the left rear of the limo and onto the motor cop. The Warren Commission cherry-picked who it interviewed and completely ignored very important witnesses. Those were different times..........

[deutsey]

29. I've seen interviews with them

and I find them credible (for what it's worth).

I would post an illustration of what they said they saw, but I'll resist the impulse. People can google it. They can also google Kennedy's official autopsy photos and see what a huge discrepancy there is between the two.

[displacedtexan]

10. There's a brilliant documentary on Netflix about the whole scary incident.

I think it's called Dark Legacy. I'm from Fort Worth, and I was in the 6th grade when this happened. And we've all thought we knew everything there was to know about that day, but damn! The facts (yes, facts!) presented in that documentary gave me chills.

Everyone knows where they were that day... Except Poppy Bush? He can't recall? Bullshit.

[groundloop]

11. I'd never heard that about Bush....

Damn, I was only in kindergarten then. There's not much I remember from way back then, but I certainly remember that moment.

[watoos]

17. I was in high school

a Catholic school. The announcement came over the loud speaker and we all prayed for JFK.
Anyone who says he can't remember where he was on that day better have Alzheimer's.
Poppy was in Dallas the night before, but claims he flew to Tyler Texas that night, if I remember right.
This makes poppy's statement that he can't remember where he was, all the more curious. He was supposedly in Dallas the night before. I better stop.

[Coyotl]

12. Where was Richard Nixon?

Not to mention his gang of CIA criminals?

[rusty fender]

21. Nixon was in Dallas that day

Amazing, huh!

[Myrina]

22. Nixon was giving a speech to the Pepsi Board of Directors ...

n/t

[Old and In the Way]

13. I wonder how this guy will be attacked here on DU?

Bookmarked so I can read what the clean-up crew has to say.

[Rex]

16. +1

nt.

[NightWatcher]

14. *cough* georgehwbush *cough*

[TBF]

33. Yup. K&R nt

[stopbush]

15. Such bullshit. Not at all supported by the forensic evidence.

This conjecture can be disproved through a single word - beveling.

Do some research and find out how beveling applies to the entry wound to JFK's skull.

[fleabiscuit]

31. Agreed.

No mention is made of the entrance wound. I have shot many high speed rifle rounds at many different types of targets, they can do many strange things. The fact that beveling is one of those things it is the only obvious explanation that would give the ER doctor a patient that they could work on for 19 minutes with a hope of possibly keeping him alive.

[Fla_Democrat]

18. One possibility

Not that I am confirming anything..... or should I use....

[DireStrike]

19. What is the motivation for having 2 shooters?

Isn't it still a conspiracy if there is one assailant taking orders instead of two?

[Myrina]

23. The motivation for having 2 shooters: make sure no one misses.

n/t

[silvershadow]

20. There is still time to bring charges against at least one of them. nt

[SidDithers]

26. Damn you BFEE!!...nt

Sid

[AzDar]

28. Word.

[Jack Rabbit]

30. This conspiracy skeptic is willing to listen to this

I've seen an awful lot of conspiracy theories about the assassination, none of them as good as the Warren Report, which has a few holes in it. Nevertheless, I have held to the lone gunman (moreover, one named Oswald) theory since November 22, 1963. BTW, I had just turned 12 and learned about the shooting at 11 am PST in room 14 of the El Dorado Elementary School in Stockton, California from Mr. Frank Chance, my sixth grade teacher. I don't know what Bush the Preppy was doing that claims not to remember where he was when he heard about the shooting, but he's the only person I've ever heard of who doesn't remember. That doesn't mean he had anything to do with the assassination. Perhaps he was fucking his mistress and still doesn't want Babs to know about it.

In any case, if further investigation confirms a second gunman, then there was a second gunman. Who was he is still something we don't know and there is no reason yet to conclude that any conspiracy extended beyond Oswald and the still unknown second gunman. I still hold that any grand conspiracy theory involving the CIA, Cuban Communists or the Mafia is ridiculous on it face.

[librechik]

32. don't tell the DUer who insisted Oswald acted alone to me this am.

I'm sure he would hasten to debunk this eyewitness!

[RadiationTherapy]

34. Back, and to the left.

Back, and to the left.

Back, and to the left.

Back, and to the left.

Stone really blew it with that movie. The presumptions and speculations of the narrative - particularly the grainy shots that show unreliable memory as absolute conspiracy - sunk it. Had the director not tried to show so conclusively the actors and vectors involved with this assassination, it would have been much more thought provoking and a lot less subject to criticism. It is still a powerful film. I watched it last night and am using it, and its flaws, in my master's thesis about memory and communication.

[rhett o rick]

36. GD Host - Locking and redirecting to CS.