Friday, November 22, 2013

You Cannot Depend On the Emergency Room for Free Care (Or Much Care At All But You Can Depend on Bills and Collections Agents) and Tribute to Real JFK Assassination Investigators Amid MSM Frenzy

It's All Capitalism All the Time, folks.

Try to keep that in mind whenever you read an essay about health care in the U.S. (or actually about anything in the U.S.).

After all, what did you think Paul Wolfowitz and Barney Feith were doing after the fire bombing of Iraq? Helping the wounded?

It seems we've been made into a country of sociopaths who see people in need of aid every day all around us, and we turn our heads away.

(Please consider making even a small contribution to the Welcome to  Pottersville2 Quarterly Fundraiser happening now ($5.00 is suggested for those on a tight budget) or sending a link to your friends if you think the subjects discussed here are worth publicizing. Thank you for your support. We really appreciate it. Anything you can do will make a huge difference in this blog's ability to survive in these difficult economic times.)

I had an argument a little while ago with a professional in a law office who assured me that Emergency Room care was available to anyone and a good alternative for those without health insurance (or money). After all, he said, his cousin used it all the time.

I tried to tell him that I knew people who had received thousands of dollars of medical bills from ER visits (I had one myself for a cracked tooth on a Saturday a little while ago) and had their unpaid bills referred to bill collectors, but he wouldn't believe me. He was absolutely convinced by repeated assurances from the MSM soothsayers that Emergency Rooms had to provide free what a regular doctor would when presented with a sick person.

Today I noticed the following essay at Alternet and thought it was a perfect antidote to my continued frustration when facing this misinformed but unalloyedly confidence crowd. (P.S. One could read any of the stories at Alternet as a sure cure for ennui.)

There’s a popular myth that the uninsured — in Texas, that’s 25 percent of us — can always get medical care through emergency rooms. Ted Cruz has argued that it is “much cheaper to provide emergency care than it is to expand Medicaid,” and Rick Perry has claimed that Texans prefer the ER system.
The myth is based on a 1986 federal law called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which states that hospitals with emergency rooms have to accept and stabilize patients who are in labor or who have an acute medical condition that threatens life or limb. That word “stabilize” is key: Hospital ERs don’t have to treat you. They just have to patch you up to the point where you’re not actively dying.
Also, hospitals charge for ER care, and usually send patients to collections when they cannot pay.

I Watched My Patients Die of Treatable Diseases Because They Were Poor

A Galveston medical student describes life and death in the non-existent Texas safety net.

November 19, 2013

The following story first appeared in the Texas Observer. 

The first patient who called me “doctor” died a few winters ago. I met him at the St. Vincent’s Student-Run Free Clinic on Galveston Island. I was a first-year medical student then, and the disease in his body baffled me. His belly was swollen, his eyes were yellow and his blood tests were all awry. It hurt when he swallowed and his urine stank.

I saw him every Thursday afternoon. I would do a physical exam, talk to him, and consult with the doctor. We ran blood counts and wrote a prescription for an antacid — not the best medication, but one you can get for $4 a month. His disease seemed serious, but we couldn’t diagnose him at the free clinic because the tests needed to do so — a CT scan, a biopsy of the liver, a test to look for cancer cells in the fluid in his belly — are beyond our financial reach.
He started calling me “Dr. Rachel.” When his pain got so bad that he couldn’t eat, we decided to send him to the emergency room. It was not an easy decision.

There’s a popular myth that the uninsured — in Texas, that’s 25 percent of us — can always get medical care through emergency rooms. Ted Cruz has argued that it is “much cheaper to provide emergency care than it is to expand Medicaid,” and Rick Perry has claimed that Texans prefer the ER system.

The myth is based on a 1986 federal law called the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which states that hospitals with emergency rooms have to accept and stabilize patients who are in labor or who have an acute medical condition that threatens life or limb. That word “stabilize” is key: Hospital ERs don’t have to treat you. They just have to patch you up to the point where you’re not actively dying. Also, hospitals charge for ER care, and usually send patients to collections when they cannot pay.

My patient went to the ER, but didn’t get treatment. Although he was obviously sick, it wasn’t an emergency that threatened life or limb. He came back to St. Vincent’s, where I went through my routine: conversation, vital signs, physical exam. We laughed a lot, even though we both knew it was a bad situation.

One night, a friend called to say that my patient was in the hospital. He’d finally gotten so anemic that he couldn’t catch his breath, and the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), where I am a student, took him in. My friend emailed me the results of his CT scans: There was cancer in his kidney, his liver and his lungs. It must have been spreading over the weeks that he’d been coming into St. Vincent’s.

I went to visit him that night. “There’s my doctor!” he called out when he saw me. I sat next to him, and he explained that he was waiting to call his sister until they told him whether or not the cancer was “bad.”

“It might be one of those real treatable kinds of cancers,” he said. I nodded uncomfortably. We talked for a while, and when I left he said, “Well now you know where I am, so you can come visit me.”

I never came back. I was too ashamed, and too early in my training to even recognize why I felt that way. After all, I had done everything I could — what did I have to feel ashamed of?

UTMB sent him to hospice, and he died at home a few months later. I read his obituary in the Galveston County Daily News.

The shame has stuck with me through my medical training — not only from my first patient, but from many more. I am now a director of the free clinic. It’s a volunteer position. I love my patients, and I love being able to help many who need primary care: blood pressure control, pap smears, diabetes management. We even do some specialty care. But the free clinic is also where some people learn that there is no hope for the chemotherapy or surgery that they need but can’t afford. When UTMB refuses to treat them, it falls to us to tell them that they will die of diseases that are, in fact, treatable.

St. Vincent’s is the primary care provider for more than 2,000 patients across Southeast Texas. Our catchment area is a strip of coastal plain strung with barrier islands. Drive inland and you start to see live oaks; go toward the coast and the oil refineries loom up over neighborhoods. The most polluting refinery in the nation is here, in Texas City. Our patients are factory workers, laborers, laid-off healthcare workers, the people behind the counters of seafood restaurants.

Most of our patients come from Galveston and Brazoria counties, but some drive two hours from Port Arthur or over from Orange, near the Texas-Louisiana border, to get to us. That’s how hard it is to see a doctor in Southeast Texas: People take a day off work to drive two hours to a student-run clinic that can only provide basic care.

The clinic is overseen by faculty physicians — UTMB docs — who see every patient along with us students and prescribe medications. These doctors are volunteers. We are not a UTMB clinic, but we depend on UTMB, which is twenty blocks from St. Vincent’s, for training our student volunteers, for liability insurance and for running our blood tests and other labs. UTMB has given us grants, including one that helped us get our electronic medical records system, and funds a nurse-managed day clinic for the uninsured at St. Vincent’s House.

But UTMB is no longer the state-subsidized charity hospital it used to be. The changes began before Hurricane Ike in 2008. But after the storm, UTMB administrators drastically cut charity care and moved clinics to the mainland, where there are more paying patients. The old motto “Here for the Health of Texas” was replaced by “Working together to work wonders.” Among those wonders are a new surgical tower and a plan to capitalize on Galveston’s semi-tropical charm by attracting wealthy healthcare tourists from abroad.

Medical care for the poor is not, apparently, among the wonders. Whereas UTMB accepted 77 percent of charity referrals in 2005, it was only taking 9 percent in 2011.

UTMB ascribes these changes to financial strain from Hurricane Ike, the county’s inability to negotiate a suitable indigent-care contract and loss of state funding. The state blames budget shortfalls. The Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, could have been a huge relief. However, Gov. Rick Perry rejected billions of dollars in federal funding to expand Medicaid, funding that should have brought access to more than a million Texans, including many St. Vincent’s patients.

Perry’s refusal is catastrophic health policy. For patients, it means that seeking medical care will still require risking bankruptcy, and may lead nowhere. For doctors, the message was not only that our patients’ lives don’t matter, but also that medicine — our old profession, so full of people who genuinely want to help others — will continue to be part of the economic machine that entrenches poverty. When the poor seek our help, they often wind up with crippling debt.

Because they can no longer count on UTMB to accept their patients, UTMB doctors now refer many to St. Vincent’s. They’ll treat someone for a heart attack (because that’s an emergency covered by EMTALA), then refer them to us for follow-up, even though we don’t have a cardiologist. They’ll stabilize a patient after her third stroke, put her on blood thinners and send her to us. They once sent us, from the ER, a man with a broken arm. They put the arm in a splint and referred him to us. What did they expect us to do — orthopedic surgery? Put on a cast? We don’t even have an x-ray machine.

I do not think that these referrals are an official policy. Rather, they are the work of doctors and nurses trying to dosomething for patients who have been refused care through the financial screening process at the hospital. Former St. Vincent’s leader Dr. Merle Lenihan has described the clinic as a “moral safety valve.” It protects UTMB from confronting the consequences of the state’s refusal to provide care.

Among those consequences are the deaths of the poor. As Howard Brody, director of the Institute for the Medical Humanities, has shown, 9,000 Texans per year will die needlessly as a result of our failure to expand Medicaid. However, because dying patients are often too sick, exhausted and wracked with pain to protest, UTMB and states like Texas aren’t forced to reckon with the consequences of their policy decisions.

Because the very sick and the dying may not be able to speak about these issues, health-care providers — particularly the providers of the so-called “safety net” — must do so. It is in our clinics, in the bodies of our patients, where the consequences get played out.

Danielle has schizophrenia, and she’s young, and she struggles with the medications. When we talk, there are long gaps in the conversation where, I think, she hears other voices. In one of these gaps, I notice the sun slanting in where it’s beginning to set beyond the ship channel. There’s gospel music streaming out over the basketball court from the speakers mounted on the side of the community center. I am reminded of what the director of the community center, an Episcopal minister, believes: Every patient is a miracle. The St. Vincent’s House motto is “An oasis of hope, expecting miracles.”

Danielle looks up and stares right at me. “Here’s what I want to know,” she says. “Why are we so poor?”

St. Vincent’s House, which hosts the free clinic, is a historically African-American community center in the lowest-income neighborhood on our island, next to where the housing projects were before they were condemned. The federal government ordered Galveston to rebuild the public housing after Hurricane Ike, but the city refused. We elected a mayor who ran on an explicit anti-public housing platform. Just like the medical system, the city knows whose lives matter.

Now, dandelions grow in the empty lots left after Ike flooded the neighborhood. People sit on the ragged, cracking curbs, and run wheelchairs right down the middle of the street because the sidewalks tend to end in grassy fields or little precipices.
The community center employs a person to stand in the street and walk us to our cars after clinic if we want. Who is he protecting us from, I wonder. Our patients?

In my second year of medical school, I took a small-group course with a famously terrifying surgeon. He told us his moral motto: “A physician never takes away hope.”

I never figured out how that motto could guide doctors through a system where our patients are dying from treatable diseases. Part of my job, it seems, is precisely that: to sit down with patients and, as gently as possible, take away hope.

Consider Vanessa and Jimmy. They met in New Orleans when she was 18. She was working cleaning motels, and he took her on a tour of the tugboat he was captain of. Vanessa says they came to St. Vincent’s because the shipyard Jimmy worked for opted out of providing insurance even for full-time employees like him. They looked for insurance on the open market, but couldn’t afford it.

The Affordable Care Act is supposed to help families like Vanessa and Jimmy get insurance. Folks higher on the income scale should now be able to afford insurance thanks to government subsidies. The poorest of the (legally documented) poor should be covered by Medicaid. And for those people in between, the federal government offered to pay for almost all the costs of expanding Medicaid.

More than a million Texans — and most St. Vincent’s patients — are somewhere in between. They are the working poor, or they are adults without dependent children, who cannot qualify for Medicaid in Texas, no matter how poor they are.

When Jimmy’s labs showed a dangerously high white blood cell count, we sent him to the ER. It was pneumonia, and there was a huge tumor underneath. Current guidelines would recommend screening Jimmy for this kind of cancer every year, but we have neither the equipment nor the funds to offer screening. So it got caught late.

After Jimmy was diagnosed, I helped Vanessa fill out the paperwork to request financial assistance for cancer care. She wanted to know how likely UTMB was to offer her husband assistance he needed.

In addition to only accepting 9 percent of applicants, the charity care approval process is a dark art, and we never know who will be accepted. According to the UTMB Charity Care policy, the institution may consider not only a person’s income and diagnosis, but also such vague qualities as “the history of the problem.” They also consider whether the treatment will offer “educational benefit” to medical students and trainees. Physicians in training have to see a certain number of each type of case. If the programs are hitting quotas with funded patients, patients like Jimmy are less likely to be accepted.

The complexity and vagueness of these policies meant that it was impossible to tell Vanessa how likely UTMB was to take her husband. We can guess around a 10 percent chance, but we never really know.

For patients facing cancer, this is not a hopeful answer.

Vanessa called from a hospital in Houston in early November, distraught, asking me to help her decide whether or not to let the doctors turn Jimmy’s breathing machine off. She was afraid she wouldn’t be able to live with herself, no matter which she chose. I gave her the advice I’d give a friend: that I trusted her love for her husband and her ability to decide from a place of love. Jimmy died late that night.

Vanessa’s request for UTMB funding wasn’t approved. She has received a $17,000 bill from UTMB for the visit when Jimmy went through the ER, and a $327,000 preliminary bill from the Houston hospital.

If the Affordable Care Act had been in effect last year, they would have been able to afford insurance, get treatment early and avoid bankruptcy. I use stories like theirs — cancer stories — when I am encouraging my patients to check out the insurance exchanges.

But with Jimmy gone and Vanessa unemployed, she now falls into the Medicaid coverage gap. I don’t know how she will get care, if she ever needs more than St. Vincent’s can give.

My first patient, the one who died in hospice, might have lived if his cancer had been treated before it had spread from the kidney. But without the Medicaid expansion, the Affordable Care Act wouldn’t help him: As an adult with no dependent children, he wouldn’t qualify for Medicaid now.

In a better medical system, he’d have had a chance at a more dignified experience of illness. He wouldn’t have had to wait for hours in a crowded free clinic, and assume the posture of gratefulness that charity seems to require. He wouldn’t have had to be treated in part by an earnest, but unskilled, first-year medical student. He, like so many Texans, deserved better.

When one of our St. Vincent’s patients gets a bad diagnosis, we start sending faxes: to UTMB, to MD Anderson, to anywhere that might have funds to help them. Sometimes it works out, but often it doesn’t. Sometimes I think of it as “sending faxes into the abyss.” And sometimes I think of it as the slow, diligent, technical way that I have of insisting that these lives matter.

To honor the upcoming anniversary of President John F. Kennedy's assassination, here's a particularly telling tidbit that ties together the conspiracist theories of that day. Who could believe today with all the media madness we are accustomed to over negligible events how unmentioned the murder was of the following major character in this drama by the then very attuned MSM? After all, in addition to all his other connections, his brother worked with Allen Dulles at the OSS before working with him at the CIA. Will wonders never cease?

Because we remember JFK fondly and what he said he was planning to do to really change how this country operates . . . we read the following essay from my friend at Beggars Can Be Choosers:

Thursday, November 21, 2013

JFK Assassination, 50 Years Later: Taking a Look at the Mysterious Life of George de Mohrenschildt

By Tim Fleming

(Note: this is a guest post by Tim Fleming about the late George de Mohrenschildt. A mysterious and fascinating figure for JFK assassination researchers, de Mohrenschildt became friends with Lee Harvey Oswald in 1962. Be sure to check out Tim's blog, Left of the Looking Glass).

If you want to unravel the mysteries of the JFK case, all you have to do is follow one George de Mohrenschildt, CIA covert asset, oil geologist, Russian royalty and international man of mystery. It can be said, with only the slightest bit of exaggeration, that de Mohrenschildt knew everyone involved in The Big Hit.

De Mohrenschildt was well acquainted with the Bush family. De Mohrenschildt's nephew, Eddie Hooker, had been George H.W. Bush's prep school roommate at Phillips Academy in Massachusetts. De Mohrenschildt and Hooker went into the oil business in West Texas at the same time that Bush was working there as a Dresser Industries employee.

Speaking of Dresser Industries, it was closely aligned with a fashion/sportswear business in Dallas called Nardi’s. De Mohrenschildt’s wife Jeanne worked at Nardi’s in the 1950s alongside Abraham Zapruder. Yes, that Zapruder: the man who made the most infamous home movie of all time. While Jeanne designed the clothing, Abe cut the patterns.

Think about that for a moment. The man who filmed the murder of JFK worked closely with the wife of the accused assassin’s best friend. My head hurts.

The De Mohrenschildt family was steeped in an intelligence background. George's older brother Dmitri worked, on many occasions, with Allen Dulles of the OSS/CIA. George himself started doing covert work for the CIA in the 1950s. When he moved to Dallas in 1952 he joined the Dallas Petroleum Club and the Council on Foreign Relations; both organizations’ membership lists read like a who’s who of Kennedy assassination suspects.

One of De Mohrenschildt’s most dangerous CIA assignments (one that he certainly would have refused had he known the consequences) was "shepherding" or "setting up" Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas in 1962-63. De Mohrenschildt was chosen for the job because of his fluency in the Russian language and his knowledge of Russian culture. Oswald, having lived in Russia on a low-level, false-defector mission for the CIA, was naturally drawn to De Mohrenschildt’s acumen in all things Russian.

The Warren Commission called De Mohrenschildt to testify, but it was hardly a rough interrogation.
De Mohrenschildt was asked about his remarkable suntan and then dismissed. Warren Commission member Allen Dulles, who certainly knew De Mohrenschildt, cleverly steered the questioning away from the most dangerous areas.

That would have been the end of it, except that a couple of FBI memos addressing George H.W. Bush's involvement in the aftermath of the assassination surfaced. The memos refer to "George Bush" of the CIA having reported on anti-Castro community activity post-assassination and having named a suspect to be questioned. But Bush has always denied being a CIA employee in 1963. Oops ... Bush got caught practicing spycraft (plausible deniability for being in Dallas the day Kennedy was murdered and snooping on a group of suspects). Naturally serious investigators raised the suspiciousness of the Bush-De Mohrenschildt-Oswald connection.

According to author Russ Baker,

" the spring of 1963, immediately after his final communication with Oswald, De Mohrenschildt had traveled to New York and Washington for meetings with CIA and military intelligence officials. He even had met with a top aide to Vice President Johnson. And the (Warren) commission certainly did not learn that one meeting in New York included Thomas Devine, then Poppy Bush’s business colleague in Zapata offshore, who was doing double duty for the CIA."

It is noteworthy that De Mohrenschildt was acquainted with most, if not all, the major suspects in the JFK assassination. He befriended Dallas oil barons, he worked as a covert asset for the CIA, he set up Lee Harvey Oswald, and he even knew Lyndon Johnson.

In Watergate, Deep Throat advised Woodward to follow the money. In the JFK murder case, one need only follow George De Mohrenschildt to track the outline of the plot.

Closing Comment by Marc McDonald:

On March 29, 1977, de Mohrenschildt was contacted by an investigator with the House Select Committee on Assassinations, asking for an interview. That same day, de Mohrenschildt was found dead from a gunshot wound. De Mohrenschildt's death has been called a suicide, but its timing does seem mysterious.

CBS and Nova (for gods' sakes!) have both declared themselves to be incompetent at scientific investigation and not trustworthy for anyone desiring verifiable information from them ever again.

Who woulda thunk it? Dan Rather, I suspect. Also, anyone already well-informed about the JFK forensics:  real forensics done by real experts, not CBS's plants.

The JFK War: CBS Endorses the "Magic Bullet" Absurdity

Steve Lendman has much more at his place.

Ready now for all those heart-warming JFK anniversary "Oswald did it alone" tales on MSM sites all week end?


TONY said...

I enjoyed the JFK movie as a thriller. But as somebody said at the time, Oliver Stone followedF Dances With Wolves with 'Dances With Facts'.

Cirze said...

Which facts, Tony?

The reason I linked it was that all the trustworthy reviews said that its facts had been verified the best of any other such efforts, and they all ring true to my personal research.

Stone himself was more than happy to share all his data with anyone interested, but no one in power was.

He was the first to show the close ties of Oswald to the ONI, NSA, CIA, FBI and, of course, the military where he was trained in the Russian language and worked as a radar operator on the U2 right before Francis Gary Powers was shot down.

Radar operators have no need of Russian usually, but they do if they are helped to defect to Russia (and later Cuba) for reasons known only to the intel world.

I can't believe that you don't think the story interesting at least in light of the Snowman and Julian Assange's travels.

Well, there's much more in the movie and I'd recommend that you watch it closely again if you have the time and inclination.

It's a fun op in and of itself, and Oliver Stone seems a pretty brave guy to me.

But what do I know, right?

Oh, and Oliver Stone had nothing to do with Kevin Costner's "Dances With Wolves," which he himself produced.*

Unless you mean that Kevin Costner had something to do with writing JFK, and I've found no data to support that. Or perhaps you're referring to Jim Garrison? Or Jim Marrs?**

Love you,


* Dances with Wolves is a 1990 American epic western film directed, produced by, and starring Kevin Costner. It is a film adaptation of the 1988 book of the same name by Michael Blake and tells the story of a Union Army lieutenant who travels to the American frontier to find a military post, and his dealings with a group of Lakota Indians.

Costner developed the film over a period of 5 years, with an initial budget of $15 million. Dances with Wolves had high production values[1] and won seven Academy Awards including Best Picture and the Golden Globe Award for Best Motion Picture – Drama. Much of the dialogue is spoken in Lakota with English subtitles. It was shot in South Dakota and Wyoming, and translated by Albert White Hat, the chair of the Lakota Studies Department at Sinte Gleska University.

The film is credited as a leading influence for the revitalization of the Western genre of filmmaking in Hollywood. In 2007, Dances with Wolves was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant."
- Wikipedia -

** Upon JFK's theatrical release, many major American newspapers ran editorials accusing Stone of taking liberties with historical facts, including the film's implication that President Lyndon B. Johnson was part of a coup d'état to kill Kennedy. After a slow start at the box office, the film gradually picked up momentum, earning over $205 million in worldwide gross. JFK was nominated for eight Academy Awards (including Best Picture) and won two.
From Wikipedia -

TONY said...

You're right, Cirze. The link was Costner and not Stone as I garbled it. Big admirer of Stone, a great filmic narrator. JFK is a long film as you know. The last time I watched it seemed like 10 minutes. As to the 'facts' I gave up trying to unwind the Gordian knot years ago. I know about LHO's murky past but even in that arena there are so many avenues and theories that I doubt if the truth will ever be known.Admired 'Dances' too but Costner made an arse of himself so many times subsequently that I find it hard to take him seriously. I thought he made a hash of The Untouchables which is an epic story as it stands in history. To have fights/chases on horseback was a Costner touch which just undermined the movie to my mind. The real story of Prohibition/Elliott Ness/Al Capone was one of Christian fundamentalism (Ness) against a lawless but burgeoning lust for hedonism across America. The story is the stuff of epic without any need for embellishment. Costner, in my opinion, trivialised it. Lost opportunity. Somebody, maybe Oliver Stone, should make a better movie about Dion O'Bannion, a smarter and more complex gangster than Capone. I would buy a ticket.
T. x

Cirze said...

Oh, so it's a Costner mixup. Everyone hated Waterworld, but Dances With Wolves? A triumph for him and everyone who enjoys history, I thought (except for native Americans who had a lot to say on the subject). I also just looouurved The Postman so don't downtalk Costner round here.

On the subject of LHO let's at least agree that there are lots of intel agencies who had a fulltime job of disinformation about him beginning about 10 mins after the assassination of JFK. And that's on the record.

Stay strong!

TONY said...

Fair enough. Just saw this clip today by coincidence, in case you missed it......

Cirze said...

Thanks, Tony. Great link to Oliver Stone's thoughts on what really happened.

He's very persuasive and smart!

Here it is again:

Another few well-known facts for our further edification on the "patsy" from an 11/27/13 article from

# tomslockett 2013-11-27

. . . the most significant information in Carl Gibson's 11/22/2013 RSM article was the statement that documents were disclosed, after a legal battle to declassify information containing statements from chief Warren Commission Council J. Lee Rankin, a quote was revealed that Oswald "was employed by the FBI at $200 a month from September of 1962 up to the time of the assassination". There should be documentation for this. If not, there should be assurances that such sloppy record keeping has been corrected. It is virtually inconceivable that, unless it was subsequently destroyed, information verifying this is not documented in some kind of work papers, financial, or payroll records. If so, and it is determined that this information has been covered up, this alone would be enough to discredit the Warren Report.

Eye witness reports are well known to be unreliable and, while technically possible, it seems unlikely that such a shot could have been fired at a trajectory to hit Kennedy and miss everyone else and all parts of the vehicle, every inch of which must have been thoroughly examined in great detail.

# Gordon K 2013-11-27

A lot can be learned by moving past the forensics. For example, Col. Fletcher Prouty (CIA-Pentagon liaison) wrote in Gallery
magazine (a Playboy knockoff) in the 1970s that Secret Service protocols were violated: National Guard troops trained to augment Secret Service manpower weren't assigned to protect Kennedy in Dallas, and officers who tried to correct the apparent oversight were told to stand down.

The same protocols dictated that the Vice President should never be in the same motorcade (for fear of a double assassination), and the motorcade should never slow below 44 miles-per-hour, since at that speed, "leading" a moving target is extremely difficult. Both of these rules were violated in Dallas. It's also worth considering why Allen Dulles - the CIA chief Kennedy fired - was a member of the Warren Commission.

All of this points to an inside job, a conspiracy (yes, we can use that word) from within the military-industrial complex. Kennedy's rejection of the Joint Chiefs' Operation Northwoods (a false flag operation designed to provide justification for invading Cuba) probably didn't help, either.

# goodsensecynic 2013-11-27

Incidentally, maybe I missed it, but in all the TV coverage of the 50th anniversary, I didn't see a single reference to the (Frank Church (ID)-chaired) Senate Committee investigation of political assassinations in the USA (JFK, MLK, RFK), which refuted the Warren Report and concluded that there was ample evidence of a successful conspiracy to execute JFK (who, among other things, was apparently about to break up the National Security Agency - you know, the people who are tracking your phone calls today).

Solving Kennedy's Murder