Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Ashton Gray

There Was No Bullet Wound in John F. Kennedy's Throat

Recommended Posts

That being noted, it surely must have been clear to the designated administrator(s) of the coup de grace that JFK's head wounds were fatal. So why risk an unnecessary hospital attack?

Then again ... better safe than oh so sorry.

Charles

And speaking of the head wound. Ashton's position is that there was NO shot from the front, so that includes the headshot. Do our lying eyes not see JFK being forced back from the impact of this shot? ( Immediately after he is hit from the rear and is pushed forward)

Dawn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was in fact a lone gunman but the frames in the Zapruder film were switched to make it appear that JFK was blown backward by a shot from the grassy knoll. The film alterationists did this so that when the film was finally shown at the Shaw trial and later on "Good Night America" the public would be fooled into thinking there was indeed a conspiracy.

This theory explains a lot of the evidentiary/issues. The cover up was indeed designed to conceal the fact that Oswald did it alone.

Edited by Tim Gratz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Charles wrote:

As I've pointed out in a previous thread, a conspiratorial presence at Parkland was essential to the plan. Once the hit was initiated, the only survivable outcome for the conspirators would be eradication of the target.

I agree with the second sentence but not the first. I believe the plan was to ensure JFK did not leave DP alive. And for all intents and purposes he was DOA upon his arrival at Parkland.

"A conspitatorial presence at the hospital?" What are you suggesting? A doctor did it?

Wow, Tim and I agree on something? Will wonders never cease? "And for all intents and purposed he was DOA upon his arrival at Parkland". The man's head was half gone for goodness sake.

Ahston's graphics have convinced me that whatever was being referred to in the throat could not have been a bullet. But what about., as Jack mentioned the windshield bullet?

Dawn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dawn, then this MUST be a great day! Of course it is the anniversary of the event many historians consider JFK's "finest hour:.

But Dawn re the throat wound I am convinced that either Tom or Pat are correct. Tom believes it was the base of CE399 exiting (he can correct me if I am wrong). Pat believes it was an exit wounf caused by a bullet that hit JFK low in the head (just where the Bethesda pathologists put the rear entry wound) and that it exited JFK's throat and proceeded to wounded Gov. Connally. I am not sure if Pat believes that all of JC's wounds were caused by this bullet.

It makes sense to me that CE399 in fact entered JFK's back (probably at a lower velocity?) and did not penetrate his body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me this topic seems like a skilled piece of disinformation. A strike against the common sense. No throat- wound at all? No- not in my back yard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dawn, then this MUST be a great day! Of course it is the anniversary of the event many historians consider JFK's "finest hour:.

But Dawn re the throat wound I am convinced that either Tom or Pat are correct. Tom believes it was the base of CE399 exiting (he can correct me if I am wrong). Pat believes it was an exit wounf caused by a bullet that hit JFK low in the head (just where the Bethesda pathologists put the rear entry wound) and that it exited JFK's throat and proceeded to wounded Gov. Connally. I am not sure if Pat believes that all of JC's wounds were caused by this bullet.

It makes sense to me that CE399 in fact entered JFK's back (probably at a lower velocity?) and did not penetrate his body.

It makes sense to me that CE399 in fact entered JFK's back (probably at a lower velocity?) and did not penetrate his body.

Well! Since that was in fact the conclusion at the end of the autopsy, and in addition to having inserted their fingers down into the wound, after the chest cavity was opened and the lungs removed, a steel probe was inserted into the back wound and the tip of this probe could be seen inside the chest cavity, pushing against the parietal pluera in an area of bruising, which exactly correlated with the bruising of the apical (apex) of the right lung, then it would appear relatively obvious that, be it CE399 (which it was), or whatever bullet, that as an intact bullet, it did not exit on the front side of JFK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was in fact a lone gunman but the frames in the Zapruder film were switched to make it appear that JFK was blown backward by a shot from the grassy knoll. The film alterationists did this so that when the film was finally shown at the Shaw trial and later on "Good Night America" the public would be fooled into thinking there was indeed a conspiracy.

This theory explains a lot of the evidentiary/issues. The cover up was indeed designed to conceal the fact that Oswald did it alone.

Are you serious? You are joking,right?

Edited by Karl Kinaski

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was in fact a lone gunman but the frames in the Zapruder film were switched to make it appear that JFK was blown backward by a shot from the grassy knoll. The film alterationists did this so that when the film was finally shown at the Shaw trial and later on "Good Night America" the public would be fooled into thinking there was indeed a conspiracy.

This theory explains a lot of the evidentiary/issues. The cover up was indeed designed to conceal the fact that Oswald did it alone.

Are you serious? You are joking,right? :secret

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As I've pointed out in a previous thread, a conspiratorial presence at Parkland was essential to the plan. Once the hit was initiated, the only survivable outcome for the conspirators would be eradication of the target.

That being noted, it surely must have been clear to the designated administrator(s) of the coup de grace that JFK's head wounds were fatal. So why risk an unnecessary hospital attack?

Psychiatry's favorite form of butchery for decades, the prefrontal lobotomy, was introduced into the annals of "science" when one Phineas P. Gage got careless packing gunpowder into a hole on a railroad project and forgot to pour in sand over it. When he went to tamp the sand down—that he had forgotten to pour—the tamping iron sparked against rock, setting off the gunpowder that he had remembered to pour. The tamping iron was three feet (1 meter) long with a diameter of 1.25 inches, weighing thirteen and a half pounds (6.12 kg). It was blown right smack through ol' Phineas's head with such force that it landed almost thirty yards (27 meters) behind him.

He lived (in a manner of speaking) and became a sideshow attraction at P.T. Barnum's New York museum.

(And of course without further case study the prefrontal lobotomy was born. Such is the "science" of psychiatry.)

Then again ... better safe than oh so sorry.

Indeed.

Ashton

Edited by Ashton Gray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Karl wrote:

To me this topic seems like a skilled piece of disinformation. A strike against the common sense. No throat- wound at all? No- not in my back yard.

Agreed!

And he also asked:

Are you serious? You are joking,right?

Karl, you are right about that as well! My feeble attempt at humour: turn everything backwards!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Again, allowing such topics as this to be posted and continued, will either be the demise of this forum, or else give it the name of the "non-educational/educationally deprived" JFK Forum.

Conclusions other zan mine vill not be ALLOWED!

Ahh, schnitzel ... von more year und ve vould have pulled it off.

Vat a shame. Mein beret brought out ze green flecks in ze bunker draperies so nicely.

Heil be seeing you.

It's why we fight.

Charles

P.S. -- Are zere any Gages in ze family?

Edited by Charles Drago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Excellent thread.

So I have to ask the obvious question. If, as Ashton argues, it was not a bullet wound at all, then what the hell was it?

This is one candidate:

4-gauge-piercing-needle.gif

Please keep in mind that John F. Kennedy was not DOA at Parkland Hospital. However grave the man's condition may have been when he arrived in Trauma Room One, it's rather relevant to note that the President of the United States was still alive.

Let me say it again: the President of the United States arrived at Parkland Hospital still alive.

That would be a trifle inconvenient for the perpetrators if there were, in fact, a conspiracy afoot to assassinate the man and pin it on a Communist patsy, who, even as the President arrived at the hospital, was being run to ground and framed for the murder of a Dallas cop, wouldn't you agree?

And why did the WC consider it so important that they found it necessary to construct the SBT to accomodate it--thus permanently destroying any vestige of credibility they may have had.

If it was necessary to make a hole in the throat of the President of the United States and then immediately eradicate the evidence of it before anyone could get a very good or close look at it, it nonetheless was necessary to "explain" it somehow as part of the shooting once anyone had seen it at all.

Ashton

Of course. Makes sense.

Interesting idea Ashton but I have a slight problem with one of the assertions you made in support of it. JFK may have been alive--technically--when admitted to Parkland but I doubt there would have been a realistic chance of recovery, given his wounds.

I doubt it too, Mark. But "doubt" is the operative word. If there were a conspiracy to murder the President, there was no room for doubt.

See also the Strange Case of Phineas P. Cage that I've just posted in response to Charles on this subject.

Are you suggesting a poison dart may have been used or a piercing needle?

I'm suggesting the possibility that a device similar to the piercing needle I pictured above could have been employed, and in very short order indeed. I am suggesting that if some similar device had been used—either during the removal of the clothing, or even before it was removed, by sliding such a device between the shirt plackets under the tie—it would have produced a wound consistent with descriptions by all eyewitnesses.

I believe that if such a device had in fact been used, it most likely would have been employed to administer a large quantity of some kind of toxin that would have been completely unsuspected, yet known to be fatal, and for which there was no existing test for detection in a human.

However improbable some may consider it, it yet is not impossible—which clearly is the case in re a bullet having caused such a wound as has been described, which I have demonstrated dispositively.

If the latter, then why? Is there a weapon which can propel such a projectile? A needle has no ballistics. How could it otherwise be inserted?

By hand, as I described just above.

If the CIA were involved in any such conspiracy to assassinate Kennedy, at all relevant times they had a funded section devoted to methods of assassination. Of course if one believes they "told all" to the Church Committee (give me a moment to catch my breath), then of course they had no such means of murder.

Ashton

Edited by Ashton Gray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I long ago posted the handwritten respons of Dr. Perry to me, when I discussed this wound with him as well as corresponded with him on the subject matter.

Ohhhhhhh, that's right! [HEAD SMACK] What's the matter with me: I had almost forgot that you had graced us with a "handwritten respons" [sic] from the man who destroyed all evidence of the throat wound.

By the way, why have you still not answered my question I asked you repeatedly nine months ago, and asked you again just last week, and that you evaded yet again?

Here it is again:

Isn't it true that gaining officer and instructor status in the Special Forces, as you attained, required considerable training in brainwashing and coercive persuasion techniques, including but not limited to familiarity with works referenced in the CIA manual "KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation," et seq.?

That's not "personal": that goes to social engineering, and I think it's a very, very relevant disclosure that should be made, pertinent to exactly what these forums are addressing, and especially pertinent to what you are attempting to do to this thread.

You were right on time: I set my watch by it.

And isn't it true that gaining officer and instructor status in the Special Forces, as you attained, required considerable training in brainwashing and coercive persuasion techniques, including but not limited to familiarity with works referenced in the CIA manual "KUBARK Counterintelligence Interrogation," et seq.?

Ashton Gray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And speaking of the head wound.

We aren't speaking of the head wound(s). Read the topic subject. Please try to stay on topic.

Ashton's position is that there was NO shot from the front, so that includes the headshot.

I've fully addressed the headshot(s) in appropriate threads, as you well know. If you want to continue discussion of any and all headshots, I invite you to keep order and common netiquette in the forum by posting to one of those threads or to start your own thread instead of attempting to hijack this one.

Ashton Gray

Edited by Ashton Gray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"And for all intents and purposed he was DOA upon his arrival at Parkland".

He was not DOA upon his arrival at Parkland, period. The record is inarguable.

For the intent and purpose of the assassination of the leader of the most powerful nation in the world, he especially was not dead. Period. The record is inarguable.

Ashton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×