Jump to content
The Education Forum
Ashton Gray

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

Recommended Posts

Having noticed that Ashton appears out of the woodwork each time a general topic which deals with factual evidence begins, and he thereafter attempts to interject pure BS/nonsense into discussions of factual evidence, one must wonder as to his actual motive for attempting to mis-direct; mis-lead; and mis-represent what is factual evidence and is and has been recognized so for years.

Now, if one accepts the "Ashton Theory" (whatever it is), then absolultely nothing and no one can be trusted to have presented anything factual in the gathering; processing; and evaluation of evidence.

Were this true, then everyone most certainly may as well go home.

However!

As one who has taken the time and effort to actually trace down and speak with a great majority of the participants in this often confusing event, perhaps another theory would be more in perspective.

That being:

As opposed to actually conducting research, which I can assure is quite time consuming and expensive, one merely sits back and yells that nothing can be trusted.

And, not unlike Charles Manson; Irvil LeBaron; Jim Jones, and even Adolph Hitler, there will always be those who too are so ignorant of the factual evidence that they will jump on board and "follow the leader".

Ashton continues to "harp" on exactly what consisted of SF Training.

Well Ashton, let me assure you that it consisted of being smart enough to tell your Commander that something was stupid, even if he outranked you by multiple ranks.

Fortunately, few achieved the leadership positions in SF by being stupid.

The Senior Enlisted men of a Team had absolutely no qualms in regards to telling the Team Leader if some decision was stupid.

And any Team Leader that survived, at least paid attention.

So Ashton, (as well as those "lapdogs" who faithfully follow him), exactly when is it that you are going to conduct and present something which actually favors true research metholodogy.

At last account, Dr. Perry, as well as others of Parkland were still living! So, why not give them a call and tell them how much you know about the anterior throat wound of JFk.

At last account, Robert Frazier was still living. So, why not give him a call and question him in regards to the now missing 0.9 grain fragment which was a portion of CE840.

Especially since Robert Frazier fully documented the entry into evidence of this, as well as the other pieces/fragments of bullets which were recovered from the Presidential Limo.

Nah!

That would constitute real research, and actuall consume time; energy; money; etc; etc;.

Better to just sit back and "Yell Fire" and gather the others around to watch.

Personally, I have no idea as to exactly what your agenda is. However, since you seem to surface each time that true factual information is being persented, and you have a tendency to attempt to divert away from the forensic; ballistic; pathological; and physical facts; with your rumor; hearsay; half-truth; innuendo; etc. then I must assume that you have some ulterior motive and agenda which is targeted at disruption of the facts.

So!

Is it that you merely do not wish for it to become public knowledge as to how little effort you have placed in actually researching the subject matter, or is your intent to continue to confuse the subject matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know how the double posts keep happening. Request again that this be deleted. Actual post immediately below.

Edited by Ashton Gray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

You could be right. Having a backup contingency like this is logical because the planners could not be certain that a kill shot would be made.

Assuming toxin was administered, then the SS would be my chief suspect.

Possibly. In the realm of speculative thinking, I don't know how any such backup contingency could have been in place, though, no matter who was designated to administer a toxin, absent the certainty of almost immediate irradication of the puncture wound evidence by electively-placed tracheostomy—something that could not be accomplished by any Secret Service personnel.

On the subject of toxins, though, I have these pesky timeline entries that I've been needing to do something with, so I think I'll put them here. This first one has a personal note from me italicized, and I have added some bold emphasis:

Friday, 3 August 1962

Louis Jolyon West, of the Depatment of Psychiatry, Neurology, and Behavioral Sciences, University of Oklahoma School of Medicine, shoots an elephant named Tusko, at the Lincoln Park Zoo in Oklahoma City, with a massive dose of LSD, equivalent to approximately 0.1 milligrams per killogram of weight.
[For what reason, nobody ever has been able to make the slightest sense of. —A.G.]

After about three minutes
of trumpeting and running around the pen,
the elephant collapsed
"heavily onto his right side, defecated, and went into status epilepticus. The limbs on the left side were hyperextended and held stiffly out from the body; the limbs on the right side were drawn up in partial flexion; there were tremors throughout. The eyes were closed and showed a spasm of the orbicularis occuli; the eyeballs were turned sharply to the left, with markedly dilated pupils. The mouth was open, but
breathing was extremely labored and stertorous, giving the impression of high respiratory obstruction due to laryngeal spasm.
The tongue, which had been bitten, was cyanotic. The picture was that of a tonic left-sided seizure in which mild clonic movements were present."

Within one hour and 40 minutes of the LSD injectin, Tusko was dead.

I'll point out in passing that this bizarre and murderous test by CIA's favorite lunatic psychiatrist was only a year and three months before the Kennedy assassination. (I probably shouldn't even mention in passing here that dear old "Jolly" West also later turns up connected to CIA's Remote Viewing program, which of course is heavily connected with Watergate, as anyone who has wandered through recent posts in the Watergate forum well knows, but it seems as though I did just mention it in passing anyway.)

Then, just a few months later, there is this equally bizarre event that took place on the first day of the year that Kennedy was assassinated, half a world away:

Tuesday, 1 January 1963

Dr Gilbert Stanley Bogle and his lover Mrs Margaret Olive Chandler née Morphett—each married to other people, and both employees of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)—are found murdered in mysterious circumstances on the banks of the Lane Cove River in Sydney, Australia. There is no apparent cause of death. Their murder has never been solved, nor has the cause of death ever been determined with certainty. [NOTE: In 1989 heart tissues from both Bogle and Chandler had been preserved and new forensic techniques were applied to them. These techniques gave evidence of the presence of LSD. These techniques were not claimed as conclusive, but they were presented as evidence that Bogle and Chandler had used LSD and some authorities suggested that they died of an overdose.]

There is a great deal of controversy-without-evidence concerning whether LSD can be fatal or not. Then again, no human volunteers have been found to try a dosage equal in ratio to the hit that sent Tusko on his one-way trip into psychedelia.

In any case, according to my best information there was no test for LSD in 1963.

Ashton

Edited by Ashton Gray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jacks diagram's work great with a man standing perfectly upright, but Kennedy was sitting hunched in a car waving his arms about, surly that tie knot could have moved left/right out of the projectiles path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The "Anti-Ashton" in the rakish green beret has resurrected—for about the sixtieth time, in yet another thread where he posts message after message after message talking to himself—his DOA "case" that a bullet fragment exited the throat of John F. Kennedy, causing what the resident intelligence agent from the Green Berets calls "The Anterior Neck Wound".

Now, I will be the first to admit that the resident Green Beret spook's long dialogs with self are so disjointed and confusing that it practically is impossible for any mere mortal to figure out what the hell he's raging on with himself about. But I have made a very close study of his strident claims, so please allow me to blow away pages and pages of smoke for you, and pages and pages about missing tree limbs, and allow me to bring his key piece of "evidence" for his claims about what made the hole in John F. Kennedy's throat out here to you in a petri dish held with long tongs for you to view. So here it is, and please pay very close attention:

...[W]hen the HSCA went to re-examine the JFK evidence...the cone-shaped; flat-based; 0.9grain weight fragment had disappeared.

:up:blink:

Now, I know what you're thinking: "Waaaaaaaaaaait a minute," you're thinking to yourself. "Ashton is pullin' our leg here! He's holding out an empty petri dish with long tongs. That ain't what old Purvis is claiming made the hole in John F. Kennedy's throat!"

Welllll...yes. I'm afraid it is. Yes, I'm afraid that it's another no-see-um. It is a not-ness. It is a no-thing. It's a "poofy." What you see in the proffered petri dish—which is nothing—is the precise thing around which our resident government intelligence agent has whipped up a perfect storm of forum pages running into the high hundreds if not thousands of pages.

And who do we have to thank for the only apparent record ever of the existence—or purported existence—of any such "cone-shaped; flat-based; 0.9grain weight fragment" having been part of the actual detritus from the shooting, upon which purported bullet fragment the resident intelligence agent now hangs his green beret, and which purported bullet fragment the resident spook claims made the hole in JFK's throat?

Why, the Warren Commission, of course, run by the most vicious party-line CIA ghouls who ever plagued the ground they walked on.

If that patented spook-generated no-see-um ain't good enough for you, Warren Commission Exhibit 840—where the purported fragment once allegedly resided before disappearing into thin air—is a patented spook-gimmick twosie: there's one photo of "CE 840" showing three fragments (without in-photo ruler or in-photo labeling), and another "CE 840" image showing only two fragments (with in-photo ruler and in-photo labeling).

And despite all the hundreds (or thousands) of spooky pages raging on and on and on and on and on about a no-see-um that purportedly made a hole in John F. Kennedy's throat, the laws of physics still remain: just as no bullet could have entered JFK's throat at the claimed location without going through fifteen layers of tie fabric and four layers of shirt fabric, no bullet possibly could have exited JFK's throat at the claimed location without going through fifteen layers of tie fabric and four layers of shirt fabric.

There was no bullet wound in John F. Kennedy's throat. Period.

Ashton Gray

(tongue in cheek)

I believe the fragment was from the prototype of the new (at that time) bio-degradable projectile the CIA perfected!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Having noticed that Ashton appears out of the woodwork each time a general topic which deals with factual evidence begins, and he thereafter attempts to interject pure BS/nonsense into discussions of factual evidence, one must wonder as to his actual motive for attempting to mis-direct; mis-lead; and mis-represent what is factual evidence and is and has been recognized so for years.

Now, if one accepts the "Ashton Theory" (whatever it is), then absolultely nothing and no one can be trusted to have presented anything factual in the gathering; processing; and evaluation of evidence.

Were this true, then everyone most certainly may as well go home.

However!

As one who has taken the time and effort to actually trace down and speak with a great majority of the participants in this often confusing event, perhaps another theory would be more in perspective.

That being:

As opposed to actually conducting research, which I can assure is quite time consuming and expensive, one merely sits back and yells that nothing can be trusted.

And, not unlike Charles Manson; Irvil LeBaron; Jim Jones, and even Adolph Hitler, there will always be those who too are so ignorant of the factual evidence that they will jump on board and "follow the leader".

Ashton continues to "harp" on exactly what consisted of SF Training.

Well Ashton, let me assure you that it consisted of being smart enough to tell your Commander that something was stupid, even if he outranked you by multiple ranks.

Fortunately, few achieved the leadership positions in SF by being stupid.

The Senior Enlisted men of a Team had absolutely no qualms in regards to telling the Team Leader if some decision was stupid.

And any Team Leader that survived, at least paid attention.

So Ashton, (as well as those "lapdogs" who faithfully follow him), exactly when is it that you are going to conduct and present something which actually favors true research metholodogy.

At last account, Dr. Perry, as well as others of Parkland were still living! So, why not give them a call and tell them how much you know about the anterior throat wound of JFk.

At last account, Robert Frazier was still living. So, why not give him a call and question him in regards to the now missing 0.9 grain fragment which was a portion of CE840.

Especially since Robert Frazier fully documented the entry into evidence of this, as well as the other pieces/fragments of bullets which were recovered from the Presidential Limo.

Nah!

That would constitute real research, and actuall consume time; energy; money; etc; etc;.

Better to just sit back and "Yell Fire" and gather the others around to watch.

Personally, I have no idea as to exactly what your agenda is. However, since you seem to surface each time that true factual information is being persented, and you have a tendency to attempt to divert away from the forensic; ballistic; pathological; and physical facts; with your rumor; hearsay; half-truth; innuendo; etc. then I must assume that you have some ulterior motive and agenda which is targeted at disruption of the facts.

So!

Is it that you merely do not wish for it to become public knowledge as to how little effort you have placed in actually researching the subject matter, or is your intent to continue to confuse the subject matter?

Tom, Ashton started this thread, he didn't "appear out of the woodwork".

He has pointed out the fact that no bullet ever penetrated any fabric in the shirt or tie.

I could care less what anyone, anywhere, at anytime has written about the subject...Ashton has presented a topic

for discussion and it is okay to discuss this subject...no matter how much anyone may want us to not discuss it.

Now, about that question he asked of you? Are you not at liberty to discuss that?

Other than that...all other off-topic discussion is taboo.

Edited by Chuck Robbins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jacks diagram's work great with a man standing perfectly upright, but Kennedy was sitting hunched in a car waving his arms about, surly that tie knot could have moved left/right out of the projectiles path.

If so, that sucker danced a jig to dodge that purported bullet. Here is the last reasonably un-motion-streaked Z-film image before JFK disappears behind the freeway sign. I've outlined the freeway sign in green. He's hardly "waving his arms about." His right arm is resting on the side of the car in a dignified wave, and his tie is right where it reasonbly would be expected—covering the area where a bullet supposedly penetrated:

jfkbeforestemmons.jpg

If anything, it poses even more of a problem for the Front Shot Faithful, since testimony about the throat wound places it just slightly to the right side of the midline of the throat.

But look: if somebody sees the Virgin Mary in a tortilla, I say consecrate the tortilla and build it a shrine. I'm not here to knock anybody's religion. I'm only trying to follow the facts, and the facts—at least of this universe—are that bullets don't meld their way through the spaces between the molecules of five turns of a tie, either coming or going.

Ashton

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

Ashton

This is what I was talking about in post #6. You shoo-shooed it and now you come up with just the type of device I was describing. What do you say to that?

Also, you beg people not to destroy this thread. Then you go ahead and do it with Purvis, asking him about whether he learned how to brainwash somebody!

Kathy

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

Ashton

This is what I was talking about in post #6. You shoo-shooed it and now you come up with just the type of device I was describing. What do you say to that?

The first thing I say to that is that you've misrepresented the facts, and the second thing I have to say is that I'm going to keep the record straight, viz:

1. That image of a piercing needle is not what you were "talking about in post #6," because it is not by any stretch of the imagination a missile (which I addressed unequivocally in another message in this thread, and which I'll get to), and you specifically referred in post #6 to "a missile":

Could an extremely thin missile, say a dart from an umbrella-fashioned weapon, have entered his neck from the front right?

My answer there was, and my answer now is, and my answer forevermore will be "No." Not just "No," but "NO!" The entire point of this thread, and the entire foundation of my position in it—given that you seem somehow to have missed it entirely (even though this is your third post to it)—is as follows:

NO BULLET, DART, MISSILE, FRAGMENT, OR MOVING PROJECTILE
OF ANY DESCRIPTION
COULD HAVE
ENTERED
OR
EXITED
JOHN F. KENNEDY'S THROAT WHILE HE WAS TRAVELING IN THE MOTORCADE THROUGH DEALEY PLAZA WITHOUT GOING THROUGH 15 LAYERS OF TIE FABRIC AND FOUR LAYERS OF SHIRT FABRIC.

How can I make this more plain? How can I make it more simple? How can I engender understanding?

2. I already fully covered in this thread the question of how a device similar to the piercing needle might have been employed:

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.

I don't know how to make this any more understandable to you.

Also, you beg people not to destroy this thread. Then you go ahead and do it with Purvis, asking him about whether he learned how to brainwash somebody!

I don't beg.

And I will continue to ask Mr. Purvis the very pertinent question until he stops evading it and answers it. He has absolutely glutted this forum repeatedly with hundreds or possibly at this point thousands of posts that are nothing but a redundant, repetitive, hammered, pounded snake-oil sales pitch that a bullet fragment that does not exist created the very throat wound that this thread and the evidence I have provided herein proves beyond reasonable doubt could not have been created by any such fragment—even if it existed, which it does not!

Maybe you haven't bothered to inform yourself about the function of the Green Berets, and if you haven't that's not my problem, but here's a primer for anybody who isn't so totally hypnotized that they believe a no-see-um bullet fragment that doesn't exist made a hole in Kennedy's throat without having to pass through his tie and shirt:

"The missions of the Green Berets, who are known officially as the United States Army Special Forces, are sometimes confused by the public with those of the Navy SEALS or the Army Rangers, but the Special Forces are a group in a league of their own. In addition to the combat tactics and reconnaissance those groups perform,
Green Berets are trained in
languages, culture, diplomacy,
psychological warfare, disinformation—generating and spreading false information
—and politics."

And Thomas H. Purvis not only was a Green Beret trained in all the arcane arts listed above, HE TRAINED OTHERS IN DISINFORMATION AND CIA INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES, which is why he keeps evading the question USING CIA METHODS OF EVADING PERTINENT QUESTIONS.

Any more questions or helpful suggestions?

Ashton Gray

Edited by Ashton Gray

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

Ashton

This is what I was talking about in post #6. You shoo-shooed it and now you come up with just the type of device I was describing. What do you say to that?

1. That image of a piercing needle is not what you were "talking about in post #6," because it is not by any stretch of the imagination a missile (which I addressed unequivocally in another message in this thread, and which I'll get to), and you specifically referred in post #6 to "a missile":

Could an extremely thin missile, say a dart from an umbrella-fashioned weapon, have entered his neck from the front right?

My answer there was, and my answer now is, and my answer forevermore will be "No." Not just "No," but "NO!" The entire point of this thread, and the entire foundation of my position in it—given that you seem somehow to have missed it entirely (even though this is your third post to it)—is as follows:

NO BULLET, DART, MISSILE, FRAGMENT, OR MOVING PROJECTILE
OF ANY DESCRIPTION
COULD HAVE
ENTERED
OR
EXITED
JOHN F. KENNEDY'S THROAT WHILE HE WAS TRAVELING IN THE MOTORCADE THROUGH DEALEY PLAZA WITHOUT GOING THROUGH 15 LAYERS OF TIE FABRIC AND FOUR LAYERS OF SHIRT FABRIC.

How can I make this more plain? How can I make it more simple? How can I engender understanding?

2. I already fully covered in this thread the question of how a device similar to the piercing needle might have been employed:

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.

I don't know how to make this any more understandable to you.

Ashton Gray

We're playing with semantics here. I was trying to describe something going into Kennedy's neck besides a bullet. Call it what you will. If it was the piercing needle, how did it get activated at that particular time?

Kathy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe you haven't bothered to inform yourself about the function of the Green Berets, and if you haven't that's not my problem, but here's a primer for anybody who isn't so totally hypnotized that they believe a no-see-um bullet fragment that doesn't exist made a hole in Kennedy's throat without having to pass through his tie and shirt:

"The missions of the Green Berets, who are known officially as the United States Army Special Forces, are sometimes confused by the public with those of the Navy SEALS or the Army Rangers, but the Special Forces are a group in a league of their own. In addition to the combat tactics and reconnaissance those groups perform,
Green Berets are trained in
languages, culture, diplomacy,
psychological warfare, disinformation—generating and spreading false information
—and politics."

And Thomas H. Purvis not only was a Green Beret trained in all the arcane arts listed above, HE TRAINED OTHERS IN DISINFORMATION AND CIA INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES, which is why he keeps evading the question USING CIA METHODS OF EVADING PERTINENT QUESTIONS.

Ashton Gray

Ashton, what is the source of this anti-SF broadside? As stated on another thread, one of my oldest friends is a Major in SF. He speaks four languages, including Russian. He's been to Ranger school and has had additional training in parachuting, skiing, and underwater demolitions. SF is the force that goes behind enemy lines and helps build up resistance movements. They frequently work hand in hand with the CIA, on missions designed by the CIA. But they answer to the Pentagon, not the CIA. And, according to my friend, they are not trained in disinformation, brain-washing or mind control. He did volunteer, however, that MANY SF officers of the Vietnam era were sheep-dipped CIA officers. This obviously confuses the issue.

So, it seems to me that Tom is either a sheep-dipped CIA officer, or is pulling your leg and refusing to answer your question because he thinks its ludicrous, and that you only discredit yourself by asking it over and over.

P.S. I understand your basic point--that it's possible someone stabbed Kennedy in the throat, or injected something into his throat, and that this was a coup de grace of sorts. I think this is worth discussing. But letting yourself get sidetracked by Tom, who has his own point of view on this issue, and apparently thinks your perspective unworthy of discussion, ill-serves the discussion of this idea. IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are JFK's clothes in the National Archives?

It seems like some of the issues being addressed in this thread could be resolved if an expert was allowed to examine the cloths and report on all defects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are JFK's clothes in the National Archives?

It seems like some of the issues being addressed in this thread could be resolved if an expert was allowed to examine the cloths and report on all defects.

Tim, I have the video of Baden's testimony, and it's clear the hole on the back of the jacket is below the slits on the shirt collar. I have a photo of this in the Single Bullet Theory chapter at patspeer.com. There are also close-up photos of the collar in Weisberg's books and in Professor Mcknight's essay at Mary Ferrell. Some CTs, including Dr. Mantik have taken a look at the clothes and have conceded that the slits overlap and that they quite possibly represent an entrance or exit of some kind. The question is what kind. From what I can gather, the FBI's Robert Frazier conceded in one of Weisberg's FOIA suits that the slits may have indicated that the bullet was not traveling at a very high speed. This supports my theory that the throat wound was the exit of a subsonic bullet traveling down the neck.

That said, I still want to hear Ashton out, as this is a rarely explored topic and there just might be a better answer out there somewhere. His theory conquers a few of the questions--why the hole was above the back wound, why this hole looked like an entrance, and why it was so small. I'm expecting him to try and say when the hole was created and how nobody noticed. As yourself, I'm skeptical of any widespread body alteration plot, particularly one occurring at Parkland. But if Ashton can figure out a way to make someone stabbing Kennedy in the throat plausible, I say give him the room to shake his stuff. (I do hope he keeps Clint Hill out of it, however.)

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

×
×
  • Create New...