Cliff Varnell

Okay. I now open my mind to a scenario where JFK suffered a shallow wound in the soft tissue of his back circa Z200. He responded to this non-fatal strike in his back by balling his fists in front of his throat. What bad luck for him — shot in the throat after he raised his fists. So after avoiding the fists the round entered the throat, ripped a couple inches of trachea, burst some blood vessels, left a hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process, and an air pocket overlaying the right C7/T1 transverse processes (according to the cervical x-ray declared authentic by Dr. David Mantik) and then disappeared. That’s another soft tissue wound. Two short loads, Ben?

Here’s Nellie Connally’s WC testimony: <quote on, emphasis added> Mrs. CONNALLY. In fact the receptions had been so good every place that I had showed much restraint by not mentioning something about it before. I could resist no longer. When we got past this area I did turn to the President and said, "Mr. President, you can't say Dallas doesn't love you." Then I don't know how soon, it seems to me it was very soon, that I heard a noise, and not being an expert rifleman, I was not aware that it was a rifle. It was just a frightening noise, and it came from the right. I turned over my right shoulder and looked back, and saw the President as he had both hands at his neck. <\q> First-shot/throat shot.

Linda Willis stood to JFK’s left and behind him during the shooting sequence. From her WC testimony. <quote on, emphasis added> Mr. LIEBELER. Did You hear any shots, or what you later learned to be shots, as the motorcade came past you there? Miss WILLIS. Yes; I heard one. Then there was a little bit of time, and then there were two real fast bullets together. When the first one hit, well, the President turned from waving to the people, and he grabbed his throat, and he kind of slumped forward, and then I couldn’t tell where the second shot went. <\q> First-shot/throat shot.

According to you, Ben, this round had to have been fired 50 - 60 yards away. JFK was 90 yards away when he was shot in the back.

No, Ben, we can all see JFK raise his hands to his throat in the Zfilm. Even you. Bennett could not have seen the back shot prior to turning to the front, which Altgens 6 shows had not yet occurred as of Z255. You don’t collate any facts at all. You cite no evidence of a first shot/back shot, instead you pronounce it was a fact on the basis of nothing. Imagine getting a lecture on keeping an open mind from someone who is thoroughly close minded to anything he can’t spin to suit his pet theories. You need to quit mis-representing the facts, Ben. Until then I’ll be here to call you out on your fictions.

You’re not entitled to mis-represent the facts of the case without getting called on it.

I don’t respect people making things up. JFK shot in the throat, JBC shot, JFK shot in the back, then the head. You insist the first shot hit his back but the Zfilm and Bennett’s account prove otherwise. I’ve repeatedly cited the evidence debunking your claim and you continue to ignore it. Why should you get a pass? You should try and get your facts straight.

No Ben, it doesn’t come down to a difference of opinion. You make a claim — first shot/back shot — contradicted by the evidence: The Zfilm shows JFK responding to a throat shot first; Bennett placed the back wound right before the headshot — 90 yards away, not 50 -60. You don’t get to make stuff up and insist it’s true without getting called on it.

Ben Cole is determined to ignore the fact that JFK reacted to the throat shot first, and according to SSA Glen Bennett’s well corroborated contemporaneous account the back shot immediately preceded the head shot, around 90 yards away. Ben routinely ignores evidence he can’t spin to fit his pet theories.

I find that approach to your blatant obfuscation intellectually dishonest.

The Zfilm shows JFK reacting first to the throat shot; Bennett’s corroborated account puts the back shot later. These facts are contrary to your pet theory so your mind is closed to them.

And neither claimed JFK was shot in the back initially. None of whom claimed the first shot struck his back. Not in regard to the back wound. None of that has anything to do with the back wound. So what? Bennett’s account was contemporaneous and corroborated by Willis 5 and Altgens 6. You have zero basis for claiming a first-shot/back shot. None.

And no one describes the back shot first. Bennett could not have seen the back shot that early — he was looking to the right in Willis 5 (Z202). Sure, he was shot in the throat. That’s why his fists were balled — so he wouldn’t get shot in the throat again. Shot in the throat, sure. You weren’t there. Bennett was.

The best I can do is my 1955 Yukon Copper Cores MM-on-red-velvet calendar.

The limo is in the shop?

But according to SSA Glen Bennett’s well-corroborated contemporaneous written account JFK was shot immediately before the head shot — about 90 yards from the “short load” location. Undercharged round misses the target by inches over 90 yards? No way.

No, you could address the issues raised. You’re entitled to your opinions, of course, but not to your own facts. Ben posits a short load distance of 50 - 75 yards but Bennett’s corroborated account makes it closer to 90. Surely we can agree on the fact that 50 - 75 ain’t 90?

At 90 yards. Really? Not to mention the soft tissue no-exit wound in the throat — two short loads?

People who bash witnesses annoy me. I’m an outlier in this regard — expressions of annoyance are rare on Kennedy assassination boards.

Indeed. https://www.cryptogon.com/?p=67681 <quote on> Former Secret Service agent, Paul Landis, found the Magic Bullet on the top of the back seat of the limo? Undercharged round??? Mmm hmm. Nealy 60 years after the JFK assassination, we now have Magic Bullet 2.0. Can anyone explain to me how the possibly “undercharged” Magic Bullet 2.0 managed to hit the target at all if the person firing the rifle dialed in DOPE [Data Observed from Previous Engagements?] for a standard velocity round? Not only did the “undercharged” Magic Bullet 2.0 have enough velocity to hit the target using DOPE for a standard round, but it then, “Dislodged from a shallow wound in the president’s back, falling back onto the limousine seat.” If you’re not familiar with shooting high powered rifles, run this scenario past someone who is has and note the response. It will go something like, “No way.” Personal experience: I’ve probably shot something like 15,000 centerfire rifle cartridges in my life, mostly 5.56, 7.62×51 and 7.62×39. Also, some larger stuff, .300 Winmag, .338, etc. How many of those do you think were “Undercharged”? None. Zero. Zilch. I had a few bad primers (under a handful) fail to fire in all of that time. I mostly fired old, cheap military surplus ammo and most of that was not made in the U.S. I don’t think I ever had a U.S. manufactured centerfire rifle round (Winchester, Federal, Remington, etc.) fail to fire. How many “undercharged” centerfire rifle cartridges have you encountered in your decades of shooting? Imagine the odds, on the big day almost 60 years ago… A defective cartridge? Tell me another one. Someone, somewhere might try to sell you on squib loads to explain this. I’m just here to tell you, in over forty years of shooting, it hasn’t happened to me, or any of my friends. (Somewhere on this site you can read about my wife’s cousin trying to kill a pig with a wet .22. That doesn’t count, because first, that’s rimfire, which is less reliable than centerfire and, second, it was wet.) </q>

What you seem to be unaware of is that the partition of Laos worked wonderfully well for the CIA.

It’s not me Ben is against, it’s the contemporaneous account of SSA Glen Bennett he refuses to consider. The types who annoy me are False Mystery naysayers. Everything is cast in the shadow of doubt — even when it’s obvious.

First shot back shot is not worth thinking about. Which has no bearing on Bennett's well-supported account putting the back shot 90 yards from your short load. You have a closed mind in regard to Bennett’s statement, and Kennedy’s clear reaction to a first shot throat shot.

Certainly not. Before long you’ll be back claiming JFK was hit with an under-charged round, Finck lied about his experience, the bullet may have transited, etc etc etc. That’s your shtick. Just don’t expect me to respect it.

No, you habitually mischaracterize the evidence: Pierre Finck’s experience with gunshot wounds, the timing of the back shot according to Bennett’s well-corroborated report, the accounts of the probing of the back wound — to name the more egregious examples of bad faith. And you refuse to acknowledge any evidence that doesn’t fit your pet theories — bad faith. Without a shred of evidence that such a round was ever produced. No, I’m pointing out that the autopsists suspected a disintegrating projectile,. You habitually bash witnesses who don’t support your pet notions. I call that bad faith.