Page 4-Saturday, March 24, 1979-The Michigan Daily Congressional accoustics experts prove second gunman was involved in Kennedy assassination The conclusion of Congressional experts that shots were fired at President John F. Kennedy from more than one location provides the first scientific corroboration to the long- argued theory that a second gunman was involved in the Dallas murder. It also raises serious questions as to why the Warren Commission gave such scant attention to-or overlooked en- tirely-critical evidence 'contradicting the single-assassin theory. According to the Warren Com- nMission, Lee Harvey Oswalk fired three the Commission investigators-who had already offended the highly sen- sitive Dallas police in preliminary in- terviews-were anxious to avoid fur- ther offense by demanding the original tapes instead of the transcripts. From the start, however, the Com- mission was aware of other evidence which cast doubt on-it not completely refuted-the theory that only three bullets were fired, and all from the School Book Depository. MANY, PERHAPS most, of the wjt- nesses in Dealey Plaza who testified By Peter Dale Scott "But new analysis of tapes re- corded by the Dallas police at the time of the shooting has now led accoustics eperts for the Congressional Subcom- mittee on Assassinations to conclude that a fourth shot was fired from a grassy knoll- in front and to the right of the President." railrod yard and to the top of the triple underpas-points both farther west and in front of the President's cavalcade rather than to the rear and the area of the School Book Depository. DOCTORS WHO first treated the President at Parkland Hospital repor- ted that he had been struck from the front by a bullet in the throat. Dr. Malcolm Perry, in sworn testimony supported by other doctors in the trauma room, told the Commission that the throat wound was "rather clean cut" and thus characteristic of an en- trance wound rather than an exit wound. In addition to these facts perhaps the most compelling evidence available to the Commission suggesting that more than three shots were fired was the existence of nine injuried resulting from the shootings: three to the President, five to Governor Connally and one to James Tague, a bystander. The explanation evolved by the Warren Commission for how three bullets inflicted all nine wounds hinged on what critics have called the single bullet theory: one bullet accounted for seven wounds suffered by both the President and the governor. That bullet was allegedly recovered un- scathed on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital where it had fallen out of Governor Connally's thigh. BUT MANY EXPERTS have since questioned this theory, including Dr. Cyril Wecht, the coroner of Pittsburgh and a member of the panel of medical experts convened by the present House Committee. Wecht points, in particular, to the testimoiy of Connally, both im- mediately after the shooting and in sub- sequent interviews, that he was shot some time after the first bullet hit the President. Connally's recollection is strongly corroborated by the famous Zapruder film, one of the three films taken by. bystanders during the shooting, which shows the governor reacting to the im- pact of being shot not simultaneously but just after the President. Besides challenging the "single bullet" theory, the Zapruder film also supplied visual evidence to corroborate those witnesses who claimed shots had been fired from the front rather than the rear of the President. THAT EVIDENCE is the so-called head snap suffered by the President af- ter the fatal shot which shattered his skull. Immediately after the 313th frame of the Zapruder film-where this shot clearly occurs-the President's head is unmistakeably snapped with considerable energy to his left and rear, as it hit from the right and in front by a marksman standing somewhere on the grassy knoll. This head snap is so ob- vious on a reasonably good print of the film that its significance was brought to the attention of authorities by numerous citizens who saw it. While the head snap of the Zapruder film indicated a frontal shot, the official autopsy report prepared by military doctors in Bethesda, Maryland-after the Parkland surgeons' preliminary examination-concluded the opposite. According to the Bethesda doctors, whose findings were subsequently ac- cepted by both the Parkland doctors and the Warren Commission, Kennedy had been struck by two bullets from behind. Medical experts convened by the House Assassination Committee, in - examining the medical evidence con- tained in the National Archives, had also concluded that it was incompatible with the theory of a frontal wound of en- trance. Since 1964, experts in fact have disagreed about the significance of the head snap and have put forward both ballistic and neuromuscular ex- planations -to reconcile a snap to the rear with the theory of a shot from the rear. NONETHELESS, THE fact that the Commission knew of the head snap yet never dealt with it reinforces questions about how open-endedly it pursued the possibility that a second gunman was involved, shooting from a position other than the School Book Depository. In general, the Warren Commission's evasiveness concerning the case for a gunman on the grassy knoll may well have been counter-productive. Critics immediately asked why many wit- nesses had never been interviewed who in previous statements has supported the assassintions. It was one of these tapes on which a researcher claimed to have detected as many as seven shots that was forwarded to the House Assassintion Committee and its acoustics experts. Although this tape was eventually ruled to have no eviden- tiary value, the Committee's inquiries to the Dallas police department resulted in the provision of tapes and dictabelts of better quality for analysis. It was from acoustical analysis of this material-analysis using simple and straight-forward techniques available in 1963-that experts now have con- Nonetheless, the fact that the Commission knew of the head snap yet never dealt with it reinforces questions about how open-endedly it pursued the possibility that a second gunman was involved, shooting from position other than the School Book Depository. and only three shots from a location behind the President-the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. Commission experts determined that Oswald Gould not have fired more than three shots at the President with the gun he used. BUT NEW ANALYSIS of tapes recorded by the Dallas police at the time of the shooting had now led ac- coustics experts for the Congressional Subcommittee on Assassinations to conclude that a fourth shot was fired from a grassy knoll in front and to the right of the President. The Commission, which examined only transcripts of the police tapes, had never analyzed the original recordings. According to independent researchers, about the origin of the shots pointed not to the Book Depository but to some position further west, along the grassy knoll. One testified he had actually seen someone suspicious leaving the scene. And a Dallas policeman told the Com- mission he had met a man on the knoll who had identified himself as a Secret Service agent-although there were no Secret Service agents in the area. The three films taken by eyewit- nesses of the incident confirmed that many bystanders-including a motor- cycle policeman from the parade-ran up to the railway yard at the top of the knoll, immediately after the shooting. Orders by law enforcement officials recorded in the transcripts of the Dallas police tapes directed their men to the the grassy knoll theory. They attacked as misleading an Appendix to the Report which strengthened the case against Oswald by ruling out the possibility of a gunman on the railway bridge, without revealing that most of the witnesses it cited had actually argued in favor of a gunman on the grassy knoll. Allegations of an official cover-up in this area began within mon- ths of the publication in September 1974 of the Warren Report. They were strengthened as bootleg prints of the, Zapruder film were screened, att first to college audiences but eventually on, national television and to Congressmen and their staffs. Meanwhile over the years assassin- tibn researchers listened carefully to private copies of the official tapes of the two Dallas police radio channels during cluded, with 95 per cent probability, that a shot was indeed fired from the grassy knoll. Acceptaned of this analysis may well represent the most powerful impact the science of acoustics has ever had on humrnn history. Peter Dale Scott, a professor of English at the University of Califor- nia-Berkeley, has authored or edited numerous articles and books on covert politics, foreign and domestic, including most recently The Assassinations: Dallas and Beyond (Random House, 1976) and Crime and Cover-up (West works, 1977). He is one of the foremost independent researchers on the history of the Kennedy assassinations. He wrote this article for the Pacific News Service. -- USbr 31d143an ilI 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Eighty-Nin Years of Editorial Freedom Vol. LXXXIX No. 138 News Phone: 764=0552 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan Health care for everyone ~FVMAr gP NJ$FxU G AM1BTIDk). g. s" tvru cb 5w2j wrIDv --,!TIA CO' P f a W HEN PRESIDENT CARTER criss-crossed the country during his 1976 presidential campaign, he promised the American people a com- prehensive national health care plan. gut the package revealed Thursday by the Carter Administration shows that the president has not kept his promise; the administration's proposed health dare package falls far short of the kind of a plan the American people need to combat rapidly rising health care costs. The president's proposal, which Would cost the taxpayers from $10 billion to $15 billion, only provides health care assistance to those who Must pay catastrophic amounts. What about those individuals and families who must still pay for the' expensive health care-though it may not be catastrophic? The administration's package would not affect them. Health care costs in this country have been escalating throughout the past decade; the president's plan would be a weak ffort toward a long-lasting solution. Though the specifics of the program have not been released, informed sources claim the plan would demand that states provide Medicaid coverage for the poor who currently are not eligible, and would limit costs for the- elderly under Medicare. While those provisions are certainly an improvement from the current system, the president's plan fails to soften the tough financial burden the majority of Americans must bear when paying for health care. It affects only the most serious illhesses of a minority and does nothing to alleviate the day-to-day cost of prescription fpi-q nhv-,ieian's fees- nd outpatient minor compared to major surgical operations and long-term therapy, but the small costs are the ones that add up until they become unbearable. But a better plan does exist. Senator Edward Kennedy (D- Massachusetts), who has repeatedly criticized the Carter Administration for failing to adopt a comprehensive plan, will introduce his proposed package next month. Kennedy's proposal would provide coverage for all Americans for various kinds of costs, and not for just the catastrophic ones. Congress should move quickly to pass Kennedy's legislation so that the effects of a. national health care plan can be measured as soon as possible. Carter's plan would not take effect un- til 1983, but the American people need a plan now before inflation makes it too late. Carter's plan is dangerous because it threatens to get approval from the liberal members of Congress who may see Kennedy's proposal as having no chance of getting through the fiscal conservatives on Capitol Hill. These conservatives may perceive Carter's proposal as a real solution to the health care problem without costing the government an enormous piece from the total budget. But they should ignore the president's plan and finally provide health care assistance to all Americans. Carter's compromise on health care legislation dashes the hopes he raised among the people with his campaign rhetoric. As it turns out, it was only rhetoric. hienhm '1'h Q"aI L Letters Aidi / " To the Daily: I am writing in response to William, Neenan's "obser- vations" of Public Law 105, an act providing a "tuition differen- tial grant" of up to $600 per semester to private and religious college students. YIis financial analysis of PL 105 is far from complete. It is true, that in its first year of operation, the Act will provide tuition assistance totaling $6.2 million. However, by the time the plan is fully implemented in 1981, the expenditure will amount to bet- ween $20 million and $30 million per year. Clearly this amount does not begin to approach the magnitude 'of state funding for public schools, nor should it, sin- ce private and religious schools provide instructor for only 14 per cent of all students in higher education. Total support for private colleges has actually in- creased 215 per cent in 13 years, 25 per cent from 1977 to 1978, while funding for public colleges has actually declined in terms of real dollars. Public Law 105 provides these "tuition grants" irrespective of demonstrated financial need. Private and religious college students have been assisted by the State since 1966. Last year, $13 million was provided for this is not fulfilling its responsibility to public schools, public school students and the taxpayers and is doing so to the benefit of the priv- ate and religious institutions, which are receiving a dispropor- tionate amount of the quickly shrinking funds for education. Neenan also points to the University of Detroit ascan example of a private school which does not discriminate. I honestly and strongly question, whether the minority enrollment at U of D is characteristic of all private and religious schools around the State. Is the minority enrollment as a whole in private schools any higher than that of the admittedly low public in- stitution level? Also, his argument to draw sympathy for PL 105, by relating the aid toa single school as a corollary to the uplifting of Detroit's culture, is clearly obfuscating the issue and bordering on pathetic. PL 105, by funding religious in- stitutions, is counter to one of this nation's fundamental principles: the separation of church and state. The Act does direct itself to this problem by: 1) denying aid to those studen- ts "enrolled in a program of study leading to a degree in theology or divinity," and, 2) denying aid to students the student rather than directly funding the institution. This does, not, however, eliminate the moral injustice of the law. The petition drive to put PL 105 on the ballot is in its final stages. I do not concur with Neenan's assumption that the public is in- capable of forming "reasoned and responsible legislation." State taxpayers have a right, as funders of PL 105, to determine its fate. It is more than a fiscal issue, and I disagree with Neenan's assertion that it is a "minor" one, it is also a legal and moral issue of to what extent can the State and religious in- stitutions combine. The State has a responsibility to fund public institutions and. also an obligation to the people of the State of Michigan to represent their wishes. The State Legislature and Gov. Milliken by implementing PL 105 have faulted both duties. -Dan Solomon March 19, 1979 Vietnam Hte schools We have always defended the gains of the Chinese revolution victorious in 1949. Compare, for example, China with India which received "independence" from Britain in 1948. HOWEVER, THOSE gains, and: the heroic Chinese workers and: peasants who fought for them," are not identical with the ruling- bureaucracy which is a parasitic: undemocratic andstreacherous: caste similar to some of the: criminal union bureaucrats here: in the U.S. Both Mao and Teng have orb numerous occasions betrayed the interests of workers and peasants for selfish short-term cone siderations. To name a recent example in addition to the in vasion of Vietnam, recall Bangladesh, in which Mao sup- ported the Pakistani military butchers with arms shipments. The invasion of Vietnam came on the heels of Teng's talks in Washington with Carter. Only the most naive will believe that Viet- nam was not discussed by Teng and Carter and that the military industrial complex which Carter really represents did not give its tacit anoroval or more likely en-