Cliff Varnell

JFK had a shallow back wound in soft tissue. 6.5mm FMJ rounds never leave shallow wounds in soft tissue. The claim Oswald struck JFK with the rifle attributed to him is demonstrably False.

Hypothesis: JFK was fired upon from at least two directions because the bullet holes in the back of his shirt and jacket are 4 inches below the bottom of the collars, and Dealey Plaza photos show a normal amount of visible shirt collar. The clothing defects are too low to associate with the wound in his throat. Alternative hypothesis: To line up with the SBT trajectory, 2+” jacket and 2+” shirt elevated above the wound at the top of the back without pushing up on the jacket collar at the base of the neck.

Agreed: There was no name association between Operation Zapata and Zapata Off-Shore. How does that preclude an operational association? Zapata Off-Shore could run supplies from the mainland to moveable oil derricks in the Caribbean and back without a customs check. The temptation to move contraband had to be intense. Paul Helliwell and his anti-Castro dope runners never used Zapata Off-Shore to fund off-the-books projects? I’m not so sure.

The US military dropped more bombs on Laos ‘64 - ‘75 than any country endured in the history of the world. All driven by a “regime change” foreign policy.

Lovett wasn’t there. The heavy was W. Averell Harriman, the quintessential arsonist-fireman who lead the charge to whack Diem and then spent the Johnson Administration trying to negotiate peace. https://www.politico.com/story/2010/03/johnson-meets-with-the-wise-men-march-25-1968-034945 Johnson meets with ‘The Wise Men,’ March 25, 1968 On this day in 1968, as pessimism over U.S. prospects in Vietnam deepened, President Lyndon B. Johnson met with 14 informal advisers. In 1945, some of them had forged a bipartisan foreign policy based on containing the Soviet Union. They went on to craft key institutions like NATO, the World Bank and the Marshall Plan. They were known, collectively, as “The Wise Men.” They met with LBJ after being briefed by officials at the State Department, the Pentagon and the CIA. They had been informed of a request from Gen. William Westmoreland, the top U.S. commander in Vietnam, for additional troops in the wake of perceived U.S. setbacks in the Tet Offensive. Present at the White House meeting were Dean Acheson, George Ball, McGeorge Bundy, Clark Clifford, Arthur Dean, Douglas Dillon, Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas, Averell Harriman, Henry Cabot Lodge Jr., Robert Murphy, Cyrus Vance and Gens. Omar Bradley, Matthew Ridgway and Maxwell Taylor. In the words of Acheson, who summed up the recommendations from 11 of the men, “we can no longer do the job we set out to do in the time we have left, and we must begin to take steps to disengage.” Murphy, Taylor and Fortas dissented. That was a change from Johnson’s first series of such meetings, on Nov. 1-2, 1967. Then, the Wise Men had unanimously opposed leaving Vietnam. “Public discontent with the war is now wide and deep,” Bundy had said, but he told Johnson to “stay the course.” <quote off> “That” happened to be the peace deal with North Vietnam hammered out by Harriman and Vance on the eve of the ‘68 election. If Humphrey had won, Harriman stood to realize his fondest dream — Secretary of State. Nixon killed that dream. It’s been argued that George H. W. Bush helped hang Watergate on Tricky Dick. Bush was a Harriman protege.

He overthrew Diem, the Inciting Incident of the Vietnam War. The Buddhist/Catholic conflict, which the CIA ginned up in ‘63, had calmed down by the time JFK green lit the coup. Speeches are nice but action talks.

If this were the case why did JFK raise his fists in front of his throat 6 seconds earlier? Is that what people do when they’re shot in the back— raise their fists in front of their throat to prevent getting shot in the back again? The subject of head wound(s) is one of the biggest go-nowhere rabbit holes in the case. Don’t walk away from it — run.

I don’t have a dog in this fight. I have a problem with “historians” spending copious amounts of time examining admittedly fake physical evidence (CE399) while completely ignoring the physical evidence recovered from the victim (bullet holes in the clothes). It’s not just Jim.

I don’t see how the 60-year old memory of a guy selling a book counterfeits the extant corroborated evidence. More False Mystery. It never ends...

So what? The more corroboration the testimony has the stronger it is. But it didn’t. Bennett’s account aside, we can see with our own eyes JFK react to the throat shot. Sure, as long as you disregard the physical evidence, the contemporaneous written account of a half-dozen witnesses in position of authority, the properly prepared medical evidence, the Dealey Plaza photographs, and the consensus statements of 16 witnesses.

So where are there inconsistencies and problems with Bennett’s well corroborated contemporaneous account?

Consistent with his statement. Where in his statement did he mention a firecracker st Z160? Out of which orifice do you pull this stuff, Pat? Willis 5 shows him looking to the right, as per his statement. Altgens 6 shows Bennett with blurred features, consistent with turning face forward as per his statement. The “problems” and “inconsistencies” are products of your invention.

He didn’t say the first shot was a miss. He wasn’t looking at Kennedy at the first report which reminded him of a firecracker. By all means cite the later statements. His contemporaneous account is unequivocal:. He saw “the Boss” get hit. Bingo! Here comes the smears, the bashing of witnesses in favor of pet theories. The physical evidence corroborates his account, as do the contemporaneous written reports of a half dozen witnesses in position of authority, as does the properly prepared medical evidence, and the consensus statements of 15 other witnesses.

“[A]bout 4 inches down from the right shoulder.” The bullet holes in the clothes are 4 inches below the bottom of the collar, to the right of midline.. You struggle with the meaning of the word “about”?

But you didn’t point out any problems. You just make stuff up. You cited the demolishment of the SBT as a problem. It isn’t. The problem with Bennett’s use of the phrase “very sparse” is mysterious. If Bennett wasn’t counting the first firecracker sound as a firearm report then there was very little time between the first and second shot. Which is exactly what you’re doing. And no, I don’t think it very smurt. His movements are photographically corroborated. He couldn’t have faced full front until after Z255, with the shots after circa Z285. There is nothing inconsistent in his account. He was shot in the throat before he went behind the sign. So the autopsists speculated prior to the full blown cover-up. So you think JFK raised his fists in front of his throat due to a back shot? Bennett said he saw the back shot “immediately” before the head shot. Your position is pure spin.

Ahh yes, witness bashing follows bad pet theories like B follows A. I couldn’t link this file, and found nothing on Mary Ferrell. What HSCA investigator, Pat? One clearly trying to spin Bennett’s inconvenient contemporaneous account. He didn’t write what he “thought” he saw, or what he “hoped” he heard; he described a bullet strike in the same location as the bullet holes in the clothes. “Doesn’t recall” “believes...believes...believes.” Spin, spin, spin... So the guy who accurately described his movements (as per Willis 5 and Altgens 6) and the location of the bullet defects four inches below the bottom of the collars is not credible because...? How is that a problem, Pat?? It’s a problem for your silly theories, true. Compared with earlier crowds Dealey Plaza was sparse. Cite Bennett's statement that there was more time between the second and third shot than the first and second. Was he counting the firecracker sound as a shot? Pat, your smear of Glen Bennett is egregious.

SSA Glen Bennett’s contemporaneous written account destroys this scenario. JFK was shot in the back “immediately” before the head shot(s). Bennett’s account is corroborated by the location of the bullet holes in the clothes, Willis 5, and Altgens 6.

From Secret Service SA Glenn Bennett's contemporaneous notes written on AFI on the flight back to DC.: <quote on> ...The Presidents auto moved down a slight grade and the crowd was very sparse. At this point I heard a noise that immediately reminded of a firecracker. Immediately upon hearing the so called 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; a second shot followed immediately and hit the right rear high of the Boss's head. <quote off> Bennett accurately described the location of the back shot. Willis 5 shows Bennett looking to his right at Z202. Altgens 6 (Z255) shows Bennett in the back seat of the follow-up car with blurred facial features, consistent with head movement. Did JFK raise his fists in front of his throat to protect against another back shot? Maybe in some parallel universe. Was the soft tissue no-exit wound in the throat also under-charged? Both rounds removed prior to the autopsy? I find it amusing that some would posit a military-style ambush featuring defective Italian ammo.

There were no sources or methods that helped determine the LN conclusion. Harriman laid down the law — no Soviet involvement — and that was the end of it. Someone Would Have Talked, Larry Hancock, pg 402: <quote on > When [Johnson] arrived at Air Force One, his first activities were to watch the national news and to begin making calls regarding taking the oath of office...There is not a single record of Johnson’s attempting to contact the National Command Center, the White House Situation Room, the Joint Chiefs, or the Secretary of Defense. Nothing shows him asking about the location of the officer with the missile launch codes. Despite his initial remark, Johnson did not make a single call or contact that would indicate he was worried about a Communist conspiracy or national security. </q> From the Warren Commission testimony of LlewelynThompson, Ambassador At Large for Soviet Affairs: <quote on, emphasis added> Mr. DULLES: Did you have any conversations at any time while you were Ambassador or after you returned to the United States with any Soviet official with regard to the Oswald case? Ambassador THOMPSON: I discussed with the Soviet Ambassador the desire of the [Warren] Commission to receive any documentation that they might have available, but I did not in any way discuss the case itself, nor did the Soviet official with whom I talked. Mr. DULLES: You probably would, would you not, if that had taken place-of any importance? Ambassador THOMPSON: Off the record. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. DULLES: Your testimony is you have no knowledge of any other conversations other than that of the Secretary of State [Dean Rusk], in connection with communications to and from the Soviet Government on this case? Ambassador THOMPSON: That is correct. I know of no other cases where it was discussed with Soviet officials. </q> No one at the State Department called any Soviet official regarding the murder in Dallas. LBJ only brought up WWIII to browbeat Warren.

He wanted to maintain American military presence in SE Asia. Same reason he had Diem whacked. We’ve discussed this before.

Scratch the Commie Conspiracy angle. McGeorge Bundy in the Situation Room; Averell Harriman within minutes of LBJ’s arrival at the White House. Harriman let Johnson know Foggy Bottom backed the LN. Yeah, sit tight at Parkland and wait to see if the sheep-dipped pasty gets whacked —according to plan. Someone Would Have Talked, Larry Hancock, pg 401-2: <quote on> May 1:15 PM on November 22, when the President was known to be dead, Malcolm Kilduff approached Johnson about making a statement. Johnson’s response was, “No. Wait. We don’t know whether it’s a Communist conspiracy or not. Are they prepared to get me out of here?” Johnson’s first concern after the shooting appears to be conspiracy. While still at Parkland both S.A. Youngblood and S. A. Roberts approached Johnson with similar concerns and strongly advised him to get out of Dallas and get airborne as quickly as possible... Despite his own remark and those of the Secret Service, Johnson appeared reluctant to leave Parkland. </q> You should read Salandria. Vincent Salandria: "Notes on Lunch with Arlen Specter on January 4, 2012" <quote on, emphasis added> I explained [to Specter] that the day after the Kennedy assassination I met with my then brother-in-law, Harold Feldman. We decided that if Oswald was the killer, and if the U.S. government were innocent of any complicity in the assassination, Oswald would live through the weekend. But if he was killed, then we would know that the assassination was a consequence of a high level U.S. government plot. Harold Feldman and I also concluded that if Oswald was killed by a Jew, it would indicate a high level WASP plot. We further decided that the killing of Oswald would signal that no government investigation could upturn the truth. In that event we as private citizens would have to investigate the assassination to arrive at the historical truth. </q> Harriman and Bundy were the top Eastern Establishment WASPs in the Kennedy Administration.

And LBJ’s meeting with Harriman was the second salvo. Salandria suspected a “high level WASP plot” — Harriman and Bundy fit the bill.

What makes you think Khrushchev would initiate a war the USSR couldn’t win just because the Americans were bombing Cuba?

How would that preclude LBJ taking the wise counsel of a high level co-conspirator?

LBJ following orders. Harriman shows up at 18:36.