Question:
The random comment overheard by S&O is only that: a random comment. Humes has explicitly stated: there was no surgery to the head area. You yourself have commented that Commander Humes had a peculiar way of expressing himself.

The conflict - real or imagined - between the Parkland & Bethesda witnesses yields to the location and nature of the wounds as shown on the x-rays and photographs taken at BNH. Is it just a coincidence that they show it to be where the Dealey Plaza witnesses and the Z-film record it? Have you seen the WFAA photo of Abe Zapruder? Where was his hand?

The damage to the brain was caused - not by an axe - I guess you didn't realize that Liebeler was joking? - but by a compressive shock wave as it passed through the head cavity. Of course you know that JFK's head exploded thus there were considerable internal forces within.

Your conclusion that the damage to the head was caused by external forces has never been endorsed by any medical panel. Are you still claiming that to be true?

I notice that you dispute Artwohl but offer no reply to the numerous points he raises. Why don't you explain to us why Lifton is right and Dr. Artwohl is wrong?

I can't speak for John, but, if you present a strong refutation of Artwohl, I am certain he wouldn't continue to recycle the posts. In truth, I understand how you feel, because they make you look bad.

If it were me, I'd try to refute the charges that Bob Artwohl makes. Perhaps you could comment on how the skull was shattered and the brain damaged. Are you sure that the damage to the brain is consistent only with cuts from a scapel, ie, that it was removed before the body arrived at Bethesda?

Answer: I then read Humes' testimony regarding the 'parasagittal laceration.' The doctor replied that he could see why I was puzzled, because I was not describing a gunshot injury; my confusion probably stemmed, he said, from the fact that I was reading from a description of the brain after it was sectioned. His exact words were: 'That brain's been sectioned.' . ."

". .then he asked, 'You're telling me that something entered at the the skull at the rear, and then exited somewhere on the right-hand side. And none of it stayed inside the head. How could a missile which travels a path so that it exits on the right-hand side still create the practically straight-line damage you're describing to me, which goes all the way to the front of the head.'" ". . .Humes said there was a tear through the left cerebral peduncle. 'The left cerebral peduncle was torn?' said the doctor, his voice again tinged with incredulity. 'Yeah the left cerebral peduncle,' I replied. My doctor friend said emphatically that the damage sounded like it had been made with a knife."Secondly, one must not presume that every laceration, or even the extent of the main parasagittal laceration was necessarily created by a bullet fragment. The pressure cavity that caused the brain to literally rip apart could have generated or EXTENDED several lacerations. Thirdly, there were some lacerations and contusions on the left side and undersurface of the brain. Again, this is TYPICAL of a high velocity rifle wound to the head. As various parts of the brain were rapidly compressed and decompressed against the cranial vault, they became lacerated and contused. This, unfortunately, is a central characteristic of Best Evidence--erroneous speculations based incomplete information and incomplete knowledge.