Robert Prudhomme Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Hi Cliff You said this belonged in its own thread, so here it is. If the bullet entered JFK's back at the level of thoracic vertebra T3, what became of the bullet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 Maybe this can help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 (edited) Hi Cliff You said this belonged in its own thread, so here it is. If the bullet entered JFK's back at the level of thoracic vertebra T3, what became of the bullet? Robert, there are only 3 conspiracy theories in the entire case that are worth a damn. All 3 of those theories were rendered within 24 hours or so of JFK's murder. This is one... From autopsy-attendee FBI SA Francis O'Neill's 1978 sworn affidavit: (quote on) Some discussion did occur concerning the disintegration of the bullet. A general feeling existed that a soft-nosed bullet struck JFK. There was discussion concerning the back wound that the bullet could have been a "plastic" type or an "Ice" [sic] bullet, one which dissolves after contact. (quote off) From autopsy-attendee FBI SA James Sibert's 1978 sworn affidavit: (quote on) The doctors also discussed a possible deflection of the bullet in the body caused by striking bone. Consideration was also given to a type of bullet which fragments completely....Following discussion among the doctors relating to the back injury, I left the autopsy room to call the FBI Laboratory and spoke with Agent Chuch [sic] Killion. I asked if he could furnish any information regarding a type of bullet that would almost completely fragmentize (sic). (quote off) The doctors -- with the body in front of them -- wanted to know if there existed hi-tech weaponry where the round wouldn't show up on x-ray. Sibert called the FBI Lab. SA Killion said fuggetaboutit. But the fact is the FBI had been briefed on the existence of such hi-tech weaponry by Charles Senseney, a civilian who worked for the US Army Special Operations Division at Fort Detrick, MD. There's an excellent chance Kennedy's killers came out of the Staff Support Group, a CIA operation within the US military, Check it out, if you haven't already. http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_6_Senseney.pdf Edited December 31, 2014 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted December 31, 2014 Share Posted December 31, 2014 (edited) http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_6_Senseney.pdf Mr. SCHWARZ: ...Were you aware that the CIA was working with Fort Detrick? Mr. SENSENEY: After a while. Not when I first went with the [special Operations] Division, but it became apparent later. Mr SCHWARZ: Did the CIA people use a false name to describe themselves? Mr. SENSENEY: Staff Support Group. Mr. SCHWARZ: And that was a false name; was it not? Mr. SENSENEY: And it was also--you asked another question earlier this morning, at least someone did, P600 was their funding citation. Mr. SCHWARZ: P600 was their fnding citation? And the Staff Support Group was a false name? And who was it designed to mislead? Mr. SENSENEY: I don't know. Mr. SCHWARZ: Is that a name that sounds like an Army group? Mr. SENSENEY: Well, you would have thought so to begin, because the first two that I was aware of were a colonel in the Air Force and a colonel in the Army. It looked like an Army support group of some sort at the start. Mr. SCHWARZ: So both the name and the personnel made it look as if it was an Army group, even though, in fact, it was CIA personnel? Mr. SENSENEY: That's right. An Air Force colonel and an Army colonel. Narrows the universe of Persons of Interest considerably, does it not? Edited December 31, 2014 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted December 31, 2014 Author Share Posted December 31, 2014 Hi David I have never seen this diagram before. Where is it from, and who made it? I'm quite fascinated by what it shows of the back wound, as it almost precisely mirrors what my research has uncovered, although I believe the bullet track was closer to the top of the right lung. Please show me more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 1, 2015 Share Posted January 1, 2015 (edited) If the bullet entered JFK's back at the level of thoracic vertebra T3, what became of the bullet? The doctors -- with the body in front of them -- wanted to know if there existed hi-tech weaponry where the round wouldn't show up on x-ray. Folks born before 1970 or so have a hard time buying this scenario. There is widespread pop culture conditioning to associate hi-tech weaponry with James Bond/Get Smart/"Surely you're joking" Hollywood bollocks. But folks born after 1970 or so are apt to have been more influenced not by Agent 007 but by Agent Smith and the "Matrix" films by the Wachowski siblings. Government perfidy and hi-tech are baked into their pop culture worldviews. 95% of the greater-Boomer cohort will never understand the first thing about the JFK assassination. That's why they can hold a half dozen "major JFK conferences" in '13/'14 and never address the question -- "What happened to the bullets that caused the back and throat wounds?" Edited January 1, 2015 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted January 2, 2015 Author Share Posted January 2, 2015 Hi Cliff I look at both the back wound and the throat wound in the same light, and, due to my knowledge and experience with firearms and ballistics, I am highly skeptical of any explanation of either wound that involves low velocity projectiles that barely penetrated JFK's body; especially any explanation that involves a projectile, carrying a paralyzing toxin, entering JFK's throat that simply "dissolved" before they reached Parkland Hospital. The first problem I have with these kinds of projectiles is, WHY would anyone use such a weapon, if all it did was paralyze JFK? Mankind has been using good old fashioned high speed lead projectiles for over a century to kill each other, and it is a tried and true AND accepted method. What if one of these poison darts had missed JFK, and been found in the street by an onlooker? They had enough trouble dealing with the lead bullet that Tague was grazed by. A projectile going so ridiculously slow that it would only penetrate flesh an inch would be so inaccurate, the person delivering it would have to be almost right on top of JFK in order to hit him. I believe the bullets that struck JFK in the back and the head were an early design of a lethal hollow point frangible bullet, such as the product sold at this web site: www.drtammo.com I would recommend that you go to the Technology page of this website, and study the info there very closely. This type of bullet will make a small entrance wound through a skull bone, or someone's back. Once it is travelling through soft tissue, it will go no more than two inches, before disintegrating into the metal powder it was made from. The bullet that entered the top of JFK's right lung disintegrated, and stayed in his right lung; eventually inducing a tension pneumothorax in the right lung that was observed and treated by Parkland surgeons. The throat wound was caused by the disintegration of one of two frangible bullets that entered JFK's skull. While the frangible bullet that caused the large blowout in the back of JFK's skull entered his right temple, the frangible bullet that caused the throat wound entered the lower right back of JFK's skull, just to the right of his external occipital protuberance. When the small pellet in the nose of this frangible bullet broke up, a fragment went through the base of JFK's skull and exited at his throat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon G. Tidd Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 Robert Prudhomme, Your description of the wounds makes sense to me, except for this: If a bullet entered the EOP, fragmented, and sent a fragment through the throat, the bullet apparently (although I don't rely on the extant Z-film) would have hit JFK while he was blocked from Zapruder's camera lens by the Stemmons sign. It appears to me that when in the extant Z-film JFK emerges from behind the Stemmons sign he is for a short time alive and exerting control over his arms and hands. I believe a bullet taking such a path (series of paths perhaps) through JFK's brain would have killed him instantaneously. But I don't know about the brain and brain injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) Robert Prudhomme, Your description of the wounds makes sense to me, except for this: If a bullet entered the EOP, fragmented, and sent a fragment through the throat, the bullet apparently (although I don't rely on the extant Z-film) would have hit JFK while he was blocked from Zapruder's camera lens by the Stemmons sign. The throat wound was described as an entrance by many Parkland witnesses. According to the neck x-ray there were broken blood vessels, a hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process, and an air pocket overlaying the right C7/T1 transverse processes. The x-ray and the consensus witness statements are wholly consistent with a shot to the throat from the front, wholly inconsistent with the head-shot-fragment fantasy. It appears to me that when in the extant Z-film JFK emerges from behind the Stemmons sign he is for a short time alive and exerting control over his arms and hands. I believe a bullet taking such a path (series of paths perhaps) through JFK's brain would have killed him instantaneously. But I don't know about the brain and brain injuries. Edited January 2, 2015 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted January 2, 2015 Author Share Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) Hello Jon I believe the first thing we must do, when attempting to analyze the JFK murder case, is to separate facts from assumptions. Due to the massive indoctrination we have suffered, for the last 50 years, at the hands of WC promoters, it is a commonly held belief that JFK suffered his throat wound while behind the Stemmons sign, and that he can be seen "clutching" his throat in the Z film. However, the available evidence shows us his hands were balled into fists, and merely raised to the level of his throat. We also have Nellie Connally, who was looking right at JFK at this time, and who clearly stated there was no blood to be seen on JFK anywhere. Do you really think a rifle shot that tore up the right side of JFK's trachea is not going to bleed profusely? In short, there is no evidence to support the belief that JFK had a throat wound prior to the explosive head shots. Edited January 2, 2015 by Robert Prudhomme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted January 2, 2015 Author Share Posted January 2, 2015 Hi Cliff Which x-ray of JFK's neck showed the fracture of the transverse process of thoracic vertebra T1? According to the x-ray technician at Bethesda that night, Jerrol Custer, the x-ray he took of JFK's neck showed a lot of other things, including minute metal fragments, and has mysteriously gone missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted January 2, 2015 Author Share Posted January 2, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) Hi Cliff I look at both the back wound and the throat wound in the same light, and, due to my knowledge and experience with firearms and ballistics, I am highly skeptical of any explanation of either wound that involves low velocity projectiles that barely penetrated JFK's body; especially any explanation that involves a projectile, carrying a paralyzing toxin, entering JFK's throat that simply "dissolved" before they reached Parkland Hospital. The first problem I have with these kinds of projectiles is, WHY would anyone use such a weapon, if all it did was paralyze JFK? Throat shot paralysis; back shot toxin. The head shot/s were for show. First shot/kill shot could not be guaranteed. Mankind has been using good old fashioned high speed lead projectiles for over a century to kill each other, and it is a tried and true AND accepted method. Sure. And sometimes nervous marksmen miss their targets. Guys missing shots isn't uncommon, is it? What if one of these poison darts had missed JFK, and been found in the street by an onlooker? What if the first shot missed JFK and he ducked down out of sight? First shot/kill shot requires precision; a blood soluble paralytic just has to reach the blood-stream. Face it, Robert, neither the throat shot nor the back shot are consistent with a first-shot/kill-shot scenario. They had enough trouble dealing with the lead bullet that Tague was grazed by. So? We have photos of a bullet being recovered and bullet markings in the street and it made no difference whatsoever. Shunted under the rug. A projectile going so ridiculously slow that it would only penetrate flesh an inch would be so inaccurate, the person delivering it would have to be almost right on top of JFK in order to hit him. The weapons have a range of 100 meters. Black dog Man at Z190 was "right on top of JFK." I believe the bullets that struck JFK in the back and the head were an early design of a lethal hollow point frangible bullet, such as the product sold at this web site: www.drtammo.com I would recommend that you go to the Technology page of this website, and study the info there very closely. This type of bullet will make a small entrance wound through a skull bone, or someone's back. Once it is travelling through soft tissue, it will go no more than two inches, before disintegrating into the metal powder it was made from. And not show up on x-ray? You need to promote the old fake x-ray claim -- although the only proof you have is its inconvenience to your theory. The bullet that entered the top of JFK's right lung disintegrated, and stayed in his right lung; eventually inducing a tension pneumothorax in the right lung that was observed and treated by Parkland surgeons. The throat wound was caused by the disintegration of one of two frangible bullets that entered JFK's skull. While the frangible bullet that caused the large blowout in the back of JFK's skull entered his right temple, the frangible bullet that caused the throat wound entered the lower right back of JFK's skull, just to the right of his external occipital protuberance. When the small pellet in the nose of this frangible bullet broke up, a fragment went through the base of JFK's skull and exited at his throat. I'm sorry Robert don't take this personally but any theory based on everyone who saw the throat wound getting it wrong is just nonsense in my book. I can't stand witness-bashing. Brings out the Irish in me. Edited January 2, 2015 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted January 2, 2015 Author Share Posted January 2, 2015 Holy crap! I can cut and paste FINALLY!! And all I did was use Google Chrome instead of Outlook Express. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 2, 2015 Share Posted January 2, 2015 Hi Cliff Which x-ray of JFK's neck showed the fracture of the transverse process of thoracic vertebra T1? According to the x-ray technician at Bethesda that night, Jerrol Custer, the x-ray he took of JFK's neck showed a lot of other things, including minute metal fragments, and has mysteriously gone missing. From the HSCA analysis of the neck x-ray: Evaluation of the pre-autopsy film shows that there is some subcutaneous or interstitial air overlying the right C7 and T1 transverse processes. There is disruption of the integrity of the transverse process of T1, which, in comparison with its mate on the opposite side and also with the previously taken film, mentioned above, indicates that there has been a fracture in that area. There is some soft tissue density overlying the apex of the right lung which may be hematoma in that region or other soft tissue swelling. Evaluation of the post-autopsy film shows that there is subcutaneous or interstitial air overlying C7 and T1. The same disruption of T1 right transverse process is still present. On the film of the right side, taken post-autopsy, there are two small metallic densities in the region of the C7 right transverse process. These densities are felt to be artifact, partly because of their marked density, because there is a similar artifact overlying the body of C7, and because these metallic-like densities were not present on the previous, pre-autopsy film. Therefore, I assume that these are screen artifacts from debris present in the cassette at the time that this film was exposed. Artifacts, not bullet fragments. The autopsists and the FBI men took the hi-tech scenario seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now