From Dr. Mantik's conclusions: “Nalli runs into surprisingly many buzz-saws. If even one critical assumption is seriously wrong, his conclusion cannot stand. This review has demonstrated several such assumptions that clearly must be wrong. At the very least, the uncertainty in many of his parameters casts a strong shadow over the entire work.”
If the bullet wound in John Kennedy’s throat was an entrance, then of course the shot came from the front. But that small hole in the skin, when viewed in relation to the neck’s internal damage, can tell you even more about where that shot came from, writes Milicent Cranor.
Milicent Cranor addresses the question of JFK's throat incision, bringing to light the fact that it was, and is, standard procedure to make a fairly wide incision when penetrating trauma to the throat is observed. She also reports a very interesting lie Commander James Humes told to JAMA—and its significance.
by Dr. Randy Robertson, at: AARC
There is a long list of books about which it can be rightly said they have added nothing to our understanding of JFK’s murder because their authors placed their conclusions first and then twisted, warped, and distorted the details to fit. Wagner’s book undoubtedly belongs on that list, concludes Martin Hay.
Arnaldo Fernandez returns to wrap up his review of this miserable History Channel series with a searing look at the seventh episode, which adds insult to injury by pretending to be an update in response to the October 26, 2017 “final declassification” of JFK records.
By Milicent Cranor, At: WhoWhatWhy
(discovery made by Dr. Randolph Robertson)
In this final installment of his review of the History Channel series, Arnaldo Fernandez concludes: “With Castro as vantage point instead of the CIA, Baer was not tracking Oswald to articulate a true picture of the past, but to drive the historical truth away.”
After mixing Oswald with the anti-Castro and CIA-backed paramilitaries of Alpha 66 in a weird pot made of “special intent to kill President Kennedy soup”, Baer keeps on blighting a big-budget TV show by ignoring the body of the evidence, writes Arnaldo Fernandez. With an insert by Milicent Cranor on the History Channel's version of the "jet effect".