Cliff Varnell

19 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Your first post said the 21st century, but since you and Sean hijacked the thread and we're beyond that . . .  You mentioned Dolly and I thought, country.  No, she crossed the line to pop years ago.  Same for some regarding soul, they had pop hits.  Then you mentioned Emmy Lou Harris, country again for me at least.  Linda Ronstadt and Bonnie Raitt have a little of it too.  

If we go all the way back to the 1960's to ladies who had songs appreciated by a wider audience, I'd start with these.  Patsy Cline, Loretta Lynn, Tammy Wynette.  Several since.  Today, like her or not, we have to include Reba in the crossover to pop.  She does have an impressive vocal range imho.

On the Country tip...K. D. Lang.

On 2/9/2024 at 12:54 PM, Sean Coleman said:

Debbie Harry, 1977, Heart of glass video, shimmering dress…..man, I woke up…

I was 10 at the time….

Miley does Debbie — smoke show!

Pat’s pet theories regarding the back and throat wounds are entirely dependent on a T1 (the top of his back) four inches below the bottom of the clothing collars.

The absurdity of this view should be apparent to all.

According to this, the spinal nerves relating to hand and arm movement are cervical, not thoracic.

https://briggschiropracticclinic.com/vital-connections/

4 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Belinda Carlisle.   The Go Gos were huge showing ladies could rock.  

Good one.  Cyndi Lauper is another.

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

Disclaimer: I don’t actually remember this that well, nor am I anything remotely approaching an expert on anatomy or the JFK medical evidence, but I remember reading a while back that there are nerve clusters around the location of the back wound that control movement of the shoulder, elbow flexion, fist balling, etc. and was curious if trauma to those nerves could potentially cause the type of reaction seen in the Z-film.

May I respectfully suggest you do the research first before chiming in?  The shallow back wound was in the soft tissue to the right of T3.  What nerve clusters?

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Here is what Bennett wrote on the day of the shooting.

Please note that Pat does not address the fact that JFK balled his fists in front of his throat at the beginning of the shooting sequence.  Pat would have us believe that JFK suffered a shallow wound in his back and reacted by holding his fists in front of his throat, remaining mute and immobile for 6 seconds without calling out in pain, or warning the others, or ducking down. 

Pat also believes that the top of JFK's back was 4 inches below the bottom of the clothing collars, but that's a separate discussion.

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

(notes written on 11-22-63, 24H541-542) "We made a left hand turn and then a quick right. The President's auto moved down a slight grade and the crowd was very sparse. At this point I heard a noise that immediately reminded me of a firecracker. I immediately, upon hearing the supposed firecracker, looked at the boss's car. At this exact time I saw a shot that hit the boss about 4 inches down from the right shoulder.

What part of "at this exact time I saw" does Pat not understand?

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

A second shoot followed immediately and hit the right rear high of the boss's head.

Note that when Bennett uses the phrase "the second shoot [sic]" he"s referring to the head shot.

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

I immediately hollered to Special Agent Hickey, seated in the same seat, to get the AR-15. I drew my revolver and looked to the rear and to the left--high left--but was unable to see any one person that could have rendered this terrible tragedy." 

Note that he says he saw "a shot that hit", and not that he saw the actual impact of the shot.

Note that Pat ignores the "at this exact time I saw" context and chooses to spin Bennett's statement instead.

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

As one cannot actually see "a shot,"

One can actually see the impact of a shot. 

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

the possibly exists he meant to say "THAT a shot had hit."

That's not what he clearly wrote -- again, what part of "at this exact time" does Pat not grasp?

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

This is supported, moreover, by his next sentence, in which he describes the shot hitting the President in the head as the "second shoot."

What?  Supported how?  The first noise he heard he identified as a firecracker, not a firearm report.

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Note also that he loves the word immediately and uses it repeatedly. This is not an articulate person. 

Gratuitous witness bashing.

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

And here is what someone--(probably a secretary)--typed up the next day.

(11-23-63 report, 18H760) “The motorcade entered an intersection and then proceeded down a grade. At this point the well-wishers numbered but a few, the motorcade continued on down this grade en route to the trade mart. At this point I heard what sounded like a firecracker. I immediately looked from the right/crowd/physical area and looked towards the President who was seated in the right rear seat of his limousine open convertible, At the moment I looked at the back of the President I heard another firecracker noise and saw the shot hit the President about four inches down from the right shoulder.

What part of "at the moment" does Pat not grasp?  Clearly, Bennett heard the firecracker noise and saw the shot strike the back.  How much more clear does this have to be?

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

A second shot followed immediately and hit the right rear high of the President’s head.  I immediately hollered “he’s hit” and reached for the AR-15 located on the floor of the rear seat. Special Agent Hickey had already picked-up the AR-15. We peered towards the rear and particularly the right side of the area. I had drawn my revolver when I saw SA Hickey had the AR-15. I was unable to see anything or one that could have fired the shoots.”

The text of his Secret Service report does not read "shoots" -- it reads "shots."  Why does Pat misrepresent what's in the report?

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Note that here--after word had gotten out that there were three shots, not two--Bennett is supposedly specifying that he heard a second shot and saw it hit the President.

More egregious spin.  Bennett's account clearly indicates he didn't identify the earlier firecracker noise as a firearm report..  

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Now, did he actually write this--or was this something typed up by a secretary from his notes and approved by one of his superiors?

More spin.  Note that Pat routinely employs this type of rhetoric when witness statements are inconvenient to his pet theories.

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

And here is what he had to admit to the Warren Commission. 

(Signed statement in the 5-5-64Secret Service report on the behavior of the presidential detail on the night before the shooting, 18H682) "I arrived at the Press Club about 12:30 A.M. and joined agents at a table...I had two beers, thanked the hostess for the club's hospitality and departed about 1:30 A.M....I arrived at The Cellar about 1:40 A.M. and had two grape fruit drinks. I departed The Cellar at approximately 3:00 A.M. and went directly to the hotel." (Note: Bennett reported for duty at 7:20 A.M.)

More gratuitous witness bashing.

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

And here is what he is purported to have told the FBI.

(1-30-78 interview with HSCA investigator, file # 180-10082-10452) “He remembers hearing what he hoped was a firecracker. He then heard another noise and saw what appeared to be a nick in the back of President Kennedy’s coat below the shoulder. He thought the President had been hit in the back…he believes the first and second shots were close together and then a longer pause before the third shot…he does not recall any agents reacting before the third shot. He believes he called out to no one in particular, after the third shot, 'he's been hit'.… he believes he saw the nick in the President’s coat after the second shot.” 

This account does not square with his contemporaneous statement -- he picked up his AR-15 as did Agent Hickey.  In his contemporaneous notes he heard a "bang...bang-bang": shooting sequence, which the FBI turned around.

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

So here, according to the FBI, in a report no one was to see or even know about for some time after, Bennett claimed he did not see the shot itself, which only makes sense, but looked up and noticed a hole in the President's coat. This leaves open that this hole was created by the first bullet. 

Bennett made NO such claim.  In his contemporaneous accounts he saw "at this exact time" and "at the moment" the shot hit.

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

He is not a star witness for any theory, IMO, 

There are no star witnesses in Pat Speer's universe since everyone who saw the wounds got it wrong.

8 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

It could be, but I think that could be a reaction to being hit in the upper back.

Because that’s what people do when they’re struck in the back — they naturally ball their fists in front of their throat so they won’t get hit in the back again?

8 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Just out of curiosity, suppose the first shot that hit JFK was the upper back hit. How would you expect him to react differently than what we see in Zapruder with the elbows raising?

After a moment of shock, I’d expect him to arch his back and reach for the area struck while crying out in pain.

8 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

I take Bennets affidavit establishing a terminus ad quem, time no later than, for the back hit, which means the back shot was before Z313.

Immediately before — consistent with 55 other “bang...bang-bang” ear witnesses.

8 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Bennet saw the back shot there when he looked.

He wrote that he saw the shot hit, not that he saw it after it hit.

8 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

I don’t see evidence of JFK reacting to another hit between the elbows-raising and Z313, therefore I reason that first hit, the one of the elbows raising, was the bullet in his back. 

Bennett saw it strike immediately before the head shot(s) — why would we see a reaction to the back shot when the head shot(s) occurred a split second later?

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

Cliff is skeptical that a T1 right transverse process could be damaged by a bullet in transit from the throat to a rear-hairline exit. I am not expert enough to know whether that is a real or illusory objection. I would be swayed if Cliff could cite convincing expert testimony on this point but am not willing to simply take Cliff's word for that on its own.  

Are you willing to regard JFK balling his fists in front of his throat and deducing it was in response to the throat shot?  No?  Why not?

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

I don't know some of those in your top 10 Cliff.  These may not be on anybody's top 10 but close in my thoughts.  The first had a pretty short career.  Janis Joplin, Ann and Nancy Wilson of Heart, and Grace Slick of the Jefferson Airplane/Starship.  Just off the top of my head, too.  

Nancy Wilson I’d put in the post-1970 category — along with Bonnie Raitt, Chaka Khan, Emmylou Harris, Betty Davis (Miles’ wife), Alice Bag (The Bags) and Arri Upp (The Slits).

Janis and Grace are my 60’s Goddesses — along with Joan Baez, Leslie Gore, Ronnie Spector, Wanda Jackson, Diana Ross, Nancy Sinatra, Gladys Knight, Dionne Warwick, Carla & Irma Thomas...Aretha and Tina probably belong in this category too.

3 hours ago, Sean Coleman said:

Debbie Harry, 1977, Heart of glass video, shimmering dress…..man, I woke up…

I was 10 at the time….

As a creative force I put Debbie Harry (Blondie) in the late 20th Century (post-1970) along with Patti Smith, Exene Cervenka (X), Penelope Houston (The Avengers), Siouxsie Sioux (Siouxsie and the Banshees), Pauline Murray (Penetration), Dolores O’Riordan (The Cranberries), Salt ‘n’ Pepa, MC Lyte, Patti LaBelle, Aretha Franklin, the A Girls in ABBA, Dolly Parton, Tina Turner, Linda Ronstadt...off the top of my head.

Joan Jett probably belongs in this category but her influence on modern female rockers burns bright.

2 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

I have read that .22 bullets, for example, can move around all sorts of ways inside a body after entrance. I have read differing explanations of air in the x-rays, and referred damage to locations not caused by direct bullet impact. Can you prove that a throat to rear hairline path (whichever direction it was) can NOT have caused what you cite? You KNOW that, do you? 

You’re asking me to prove a negative?

Okay.  JFK emerged from behind the Stemmons freeway sign with his fists balled in front of his throat.  You claim that was unrelated to the throat shot.  So what was he doing — smelling the back of his hands?

From the HSCA report:

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. </q>

So according to your scenario this .22 round made an 180 degree turn up two inches immediately prior to exit or an 180 degree turn down two inches immediately after entrance without striking hard bone.

Your claim, the burden of proof is on you.

2 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

"I'm afraid we were misled...All the critics, myself included, were misled very early. I see that now. We spent too much time microanalyzing the details of the assassination when all the time it was obvious, it was blatantly obvious that it was a conspiracy...The tyranny of power is here. Current events tell us that those who killed Kennedy can only perpetuate their power by promoting social upheaval both at home and abroad. And that will lead not to revolution but to repression...[T]he interests of those who killed Kennedy now transcend national boundaries and national priorities. No doubt we are now dealing with an international conspiracy. We must face that fact -- and not waste any more time microanalyzing the evidence. That's exactly what they want us to do. They have kept us busy for so long..." (emphasis added)
Vincent Salandria, as quoted by Gaeton Fonzi in The Last Investigation


"The real history of the world is a history of competing conspiracies."
Ishmael Reed

I know a guy who used to post that with his avatar...thanks Joe!

3 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

I realize that as I have tried to drive around Vegas and Swifties are everywhere.   Go Niners.  

If ever there was a thread that begged to be hijacked...

My Top Ten List of Rock/Pop/R&B Goddesses Active in the 21st Century Not Named Beyoncé or Madonna (too obvious!)

Alphabetical order:

Brody Dalle (The Distillers), Doja Cat, Joan Jett, Karen O (Yeah Yeah Yeahs), Kathleen Hanna (Bikini Kill, Le Tigre),   Lady Gaga, Miley Cyrus, Pink, Rihanna,                                        Shirley Manson (Garbage)

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

Where did that bullet go (if it is interpreted as an entrance)? Did it exit?

Don’t know don’t care.

Years ago I asked James Gordon to model the trajectory of a bullet following the angle of T1 to C7 — it pointed directly to the damaged trachea.

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

But Cliff, what do you do with the bullet hole just above the rear hairline? Deny its existence? On what grounds?

Multiple shots to the head.

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

But Cliff, the argument that there was a 5 x 16 mm bullet hole (whether it was entrance or exit is a separate issue) at the rear hairline, as attested by the three autopsists and other witnesses and shown with devastating force in Pat Speer's chapter 13, one of the strongest and most significant chapters in Pat Speer, is extremely compelling (https://www.patspeer.com/chapter13solvingthegreatheadwoundmyster). 

It is true the autopsists tried to connect that to a head wound exit but that is impossible, and that interpretation of that bullet hole was simply in error. But that does not change the empirical existence of that rear hairline bullet hole at the rear hairline. 

There is no other possible connection to that rear hairline bullet hole than the throat wound. 

And this accounts for the hairline fracture at T1, the air pocket overlaying C7/T1, and JFK holding his fists in front of his throat 6 seconds before the head shot(s)?

T1 is a couple of inches below the hairline.

For all we know JFK may have taken three shots to the head.

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

Etc etc...

1 hour ago, Cory Santos said:

I realize that as I have tried to drive around Vegas and Swifties are everywhere.   Go Niners.  

Go Niners!  I like Miley Cyrus way better anyway.

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

This is not true. In fact, I have recently posted that the argument for the throat wound's being too small is far greater than the argument for the head wound's being in the wrong place, and I would agree that the argument that the back wound was too low is also a much stronger argument. 

Statements that something "looked like an entrance" after all, are meaningless. What is important is why they thought it looked like an entrance and that is that it was extremely small, and, according to the HSCA, smaller even than the small back wound. 

Now, that's telling. Because the HSCA's Charles Petty wrote a textbook claiming that a wound of such small size should be considered an entrance wound. Now, there are exceptions to this in that a low velocity projectile will often barely escape the skin and leave an extremely small exit wound. 

The hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process could only have been caused by a throat entrance.

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

But that only supports the importance of this wound. Whether or not the throat wound was an exit for a slow moving projectile or the entrance of one, is not that important, as both destroy the single-bullet theory and both lead us to the conclusion there was more than one shooter. 

That’s a given.  We need to move beyond the obvious and deal with the root facts: (1) JFK suffered an entrance wound in the soft tissue of his back, with no exit and no bullet recovered during the autopsy.  (2) He suffered a wound of entrance in the soft tissue of his throat, with no exit and no bullet recovered during autopsy.

This wound pattern is inconsistent with conventional firearms.

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

Now let's circle back to the head wound.

This is where I depart.  I find discussion of the head wound(s) futile.

Hate to tell you, Cory — a lot of nonsense can’t be stopped.

According to Pat Speer, fourteen throat entrance wound witnesses and sixteen low back wound witnesses all got it wrong.

How does that impact calculations?

This subject merits two threads?

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

So you believe that the back shot occurred immediately before the Z313 head shot???

According to Bennett, the bullet holes in the clothes, Willis 5, Betzner 6, and 55 other “bang...bang-bang” ear witnesses.

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

 

Even the altered Zapruder film shows JFK reacting to an apparent back shot at least 87 frames, or 4.75 seconds, before the Z313 head shot. 

So he reacted to a back shot by holding his fists in front of his throat?  Other than the product of your imagination, there is no proof of this at all.

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

Do you think it's wise to rely so heavily on a single eyewitness recollection?

His account is heavily corroborated, and was initially recorded in writing a few hours after the killing.

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

I think Bennett clearly merged some events and compressed their time frame.

You can produce no evidence supporting what you think.

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

 

There is no way that the back shot came immediately before the Z313 head shot. 

There is no way a pet theorist will get off the scenarios they’ve married.

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

The back shot would not have been 90 yards away but only about 50-70 yards away from the sixth-floor window. The Z313 head shot would have been 90 yards away.

From the official statement of Secret Service Agent Glen Bennett:

About thirty minutes after leaving Love Field about 12:25 P.M., the Motorcade entered an intersection and then proceeded down a grade. At this point the well-wishers numbered but a few; the motorcade continued down this grade enroute to the Trade Mart. At this point I heard what sounded like a fire-cracker. I immediately looked from the right/crowd/physical area/and looked towards the President who was seated in the right rear seat of his limousine open convertible. At the moment I looked at the back of the President I heard another fire-cracker noise and saw the shot hit the President about four inches down from the right shoulder. A second shot followed immediately and hit the right rear high of the President's head. </q>

The back shot occurred “immediately” before the head shot(s).  Bennett’s account is corroborated by the location of the holes in the clothes (4 inches below the bottom of the collars, to the right of midline), Willis 5 @ Z201 (Bennett turned to the right), Altgens 6 @ Z255 (Bennett still facing right but with blurred features, indicating movement), and 55 other “bang...bang-bang” ear witnesses.

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

A short shot (misfire) is a possibility. A number of witnesses said one of the shots sounded different from the others.

Utterly absurd.  A short shot traveled roughly 90 yards in swirling wind and missed the head by inches?  Complete nonsense.

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

Another possibility is that the back wound was made by a large fragment from the bullet that struck the pavement behind JFK's limo early in the shooting sequence.

More nonsense.  Bennett’s account debunks such a scenario.

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

@Roger Odisio & @Jeff Carter,

Wow!

Thinking aloud...

It has been my belief for a long time now that the CIA used the Mexico City incident to paint Oswald as being in cahoots with Russia (via Kostikov) and Cuba (via Sylvia Duran's contacts, $6500 payment. etc.) to kill Kennedy for them. Thus setting a pretext for invasion of Cuba or war with Russia, which the generals wanted.

This thing with McGeorge Bundy now has me thinking that the plan signed off by Bundy's group (whoever that is) had no plans of implicating the communists.

I must respectfully disagree, Sandy.

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

 

And that the generals influenced a group of CIA people to piggyback onto the Bundy plot the part about Cuba and Russia being behind the assassination.

But when Bundy's group got wind of the faked evidence pointing to Cuba and Russia, they quickly put the kibosh on that. Bundy's group apparently had no interest in having a conflict with the communists, other than Vietnam, and declared Oswald the lone killer.

 

In my view the Skull & Bones crew (Harriman, Bundy, Daddy Bush and his boy George) pulled the plug on the Commies-Did-It Scenario only because the designated patsy was captured and not killed.