Cliff Varnell

The bullet holes in JFK’s clothes are four inches below the collars. Is that a fact, or a theory?

I haven’t seen that argument. I’m blaming the JFKA research community for ignoring historical facts — T3 back wound, throat entrance — in favor of rabbit holes like the acoustics, the NAA, the provenance of the Magic Bullet, the head wound(s), and any number of other dead ends.

Since my position is that public support for the LN ballooned in this century — as reflected in all the polls — it seems that you’re nit-picking a “gotcha.”

Gallup: One man Others involved No opinion 2001 Mar 26-28 13 81 6 1993 Nov 15-16 15 75 10 1992 Feb ^ 10 77 13 1983 Oct ^ 11 74 15 1976 Dec † 11 81 The JFK spike in the other polls matched highs reached twice earlier.

On the night of the autopsy, with the body in front of them, the autopsists seriously considered the possibility JFK was hit with a high tech round. This fact has been ignored by the US Gov’t, the Mainstream Media...and the JFKA Masterclass Critics. That’s my second beef with y’all. The first is the collective failure to reach consensus on the root facts — T3 back wound, throat entrance wound. This plays into the hands of the Cover-Up, creating a sense of false mystery surrounding cut and dried facts (e.g. The bullet holes in the clothes are too low to associate with the throat wound). E. Martin Schotz wrote a scathing critique of COPA in 1998 — still applicable, in my book. https://www.ratical.org/ratville//JFK/FalseMystery/COPA1998EMSapp.html

As I mentioned in an earlier post, on three occasions during the 90’s I opened up the sports pages of the SF Chronicle to read that Oswald acted alone. Then I could go to the funny pages and read in Doonesbury that JFK conspiracy theorists were whackos. Since none of that sort of drive-by smearing made an impact on public opinion, it’s hard for me to see anti-9/11-inside-job coverage impacting views of the JFKA to the extent of a 20% increase in LN support.

I’m with you on 9/11 but I can’t buy the hypothesis that the anti-Inside-Job bias in trad media spills over into people’s view of the JFKA. According to the AP poll cited above, only 35% get a significant amount of their JFKA info from trad media.

Wikipedia: Conspiracy theorists often argue that there were multiple shooters—a "triangulation of crossfire"—and that the fatal shot was fired from the grassy knoll and struck Kennedy in the front of the head.[282] Individuals present in Dealey Plaza have been the subject of much speculation, including the three tramps, the umbrella man, and the purported Badge Man.[283][284][285] Conspiracy theorists argue that the autopsy and official investigations were flawed or, at worst, complicit,[286] and that witnesses to the Kennedy assassination met mysterious and suspicious deaths.[287] Conspiracy theories have been espoused by notable figures, such as L. Fletcher Prouty, Chief of Special Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Kennedy, who believed that elements of the U.S. military and intelligence communities had conspired to assassinate the president.[288] Governor Connally also rejected the single-bullet theory,[289][290] and President Johnson reportedly expressed doubt regarding the Warren Commission's conclusions prior to his death.[291] According to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., his father believed that the Warren Report was a "shoddy piece of craftsmanship" and that John F. Kennedy had been killed by a conspiracy, possibly involving Cuban exiles and the CIA.[292] Communist rulers like Castro and Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev believed that Kennedy had been killed by right-wing Americans.[293] Former CIA director R. James Woolsey has argued that Oswald killed Kennedy as part of a Soviet conspiracy.[294] </q> Hardly a virulent attack. In 2013 the Associated Press and Gallup both ran JFKA polls. Gallup found a 61/30% split in favor of conspiracy. https://news.gallup.com/poll/1813/Most-Americans-Believe-Oswald-Conspired-Others-Kill-JFK.aspx The AP found a 59/24% split pro-conspiracy with 16% unsure. http://surveys.associatedpress.com/data/GfK/AP-GfK April 2013 Topline Posted FINAL_JFK.pdf The AP poll also asked: How much of what you know about the Kennedy assassination has come from each of the following sources. (Nearly all/most) Movies or fictional TV shows — 9% Newspapers, magazines, television news or websites operated by news organizations — 35% History textbooks or other non- fiction books — 37% Discussion with friends or family — 12% Blogs or websites that are not operated by news organizations — 6% Maybe they flooded JFKA newsgroups and forums with “CTs” whose job was to uphold at least one Lone Nut talking point — that the back shot transited, for instance?

JFK Revisited cites the T3 back wound and the throat entrance wound. That’s two wounds in soft tissue with no exits. 6.5mm Full Metal Jacket rounds don’t leave shallow wounds in soft tissue. Why did JFK Revisited spend so much time on the Magic Bullet when it was impossible from the get-go?

Ben, how do you account for the fact that the LN scenario never garnered more than 15% approval from 1976 to 2001 — during the height of MSM support — but shot up into the low 30’s in both 2013 and 2017 when far more people followed the subject on-line?

And DiEugenio still doesn’t comment on the issue at hand. Not according to the Gallup poll. The support for the conspiracy view was steady from 1976 to 2001. No doubt. But it DID continue — for at least another decade! And as of 2001 it had no impact on public opinion according to Gallup. And in the 10 years of media consolidation after the release of JFK there was no substantial change in public opinion, according to Gallup. This doesn’t account for the dramatic surge in LN support 2001 to 2017. Again, 25 years of the MSM pimping the LN from 1976 to 2001 had no impact on public opinion. What does this have to do with the surge of public support for the LN 2001 to 2017? I’m personally gratified that JFK Revisited acknowledged both the T3 back wound and the throat entrance wound. That was a major breakthrough. In 2018 DiEugenio said the location of the back wound was “unknowable.” Ah, this is like Old Home Week! Before Jim D. put me on ignore in 2018 he accused me of having a sinister “agenda” every time I disagreed with him. Given his acknowledgment of the T3 back wound in the 2-hour Stone doc, looks like he succumbed.

All well and good but you’re not addressing the issue at hand — the sharp increase in support for the LN between 2001 and 2017. There is no data to indicate it was a function of age. You’ll be hard pressed to find significant MSM/Op-Mock coverage over that time to account for this sizable shift. Does the flood of ambitious T3-Denying “CTs” on the ‘Net this Century explain it? I bet.

I never advanced such a premise. From 1976 to 2001 — during the Op Mock hey-day — support for the LN view remained in the low teens. With the advent of the internet LN support ballooned. Why? Because “simplicity and repetition” are not in the JFKA Critical Community playbook. What does that have to do with 21st Century coverage of the JFKA? And the 21st Century coverage of the JFKA, to which you ascribe the spike in support of the LN in national polls, was what? “Continued to a lesser extent” — thank you! That was my point. Even though Op Mock activity in relation to the JFKA was “lesser” than the 90’s, LN support spiked in this Century. Fonzi and Salandria showed how to destroy the LN — and they’ve been ignored.

One man Others involved No opinion 2001 Mar 26-28 13 81 6 1993 Nov 15-16 15 75 10 1992 Feb ^ 10 77 13 1983 Oct ^ 11 74 15 1976 Dec † 11 81 This is Gallup during the heyday of Op Mock — 13% buy the Lone Nut scenario as of 2001. There was scant change between Dec ‘76 and March ‘01. By 2017, 33% buy the Lone Nut myth even though Op Mock in the MSM was largely muted over that time, and the Internet usurped traditional media as the main source of news consumption. So are we to conclude that a lack of JFKA coverage in the MSM stimulates the Lone Nut narrative? Looks like the CIA wasted a lot of time and effort promoting the WC, doesn’t it?

Two wounds of entrance in soft tissue , no exits, no rounds found in the autopsy. There is a “high strangeness” aspect to these root facts of the JFKA. The whole “ice bullet” issue is off-putting to people of a certain age. In my experience younger people take the high tech scenario more seriously.

delete

As I’ve argued, the CIA disinformation campaign was in high gear in the 90’s when polls show support of the Lone Nut scenario at its lowest. There was a 20% drop in support for the conspiracy position between 2001 and 2017, with an even greater drop among the college educated. This cannot be attributed to “CIA-funded disinformation” in the mainstream media, of which there was far less than the 90’s. Your take on 21st Century CIA disinformation in the MSM is over-stated. Care to show where that event implicated persons of interest? The night of the autopsy the prosectors observed shallow wounds in soft tissue and voiced speculation implicating the CIA operation MKNAOMI. Point out where this has been over-discussed, Will. Name the JFK Conference where it’s been discussed at all, or the books that have covered the subject. Or in six hours of Oliver Stone documentary. The view that JFK was hit with a high tech weapon is attacked far more than supported on this forum.

There’s been no debate about the clothing evidence in this thread. The bullet holes in the clothes are too low for the SBT — an unchallenged fact. Devolved? The title of this thread is a sarcastic back-of-my-hand to the JFKA Critical Community for its collective failure to grasp the significance of physical evidence in a cold case murder investigation.

Yes. Regime change plots are evil whether they were directed at JFK or by him.

I haven’t seen any data to indicate that. I think where JFK blind-love has impact is in the views of historians.

Let’s take a look at the 2001 Gallup poll which found 81 - 13 to the conspiracy side. https://news.gallup.com/poll/1813/Most-Americans-Believe-Oswald-Conspired-Others-Kill-JFK.aspx <quote on> Interestingly, those with more formal education tend to have the lowest belief in a possible conspiracy in the JFK assassination. Among those with a post-graduate education, 71% believe others were involved in the assassination, compared with 78% among those with some college education and 84% among those with a H.S. education or less. </q> That’s an incredible drop in 16 years. After 2001? ABC ran a less-than-full-throated Oswald Did It Alone special in 2003. What else from The NY Times et al would spur such a huge drop among the higher educated? During the 90’s, when the MSM was most virulently Lone Nut (in that decade on three occasions I read Oswald acted alone — in the SF Chronicle Sporting Green), polls show skepticism of the Official Story at it’s highest. In this century it’s Internet/social media with the widest reach. The JFKA CT rabbit holes appear to be off-putting.

More bad faith. The bullet holes in the clothes are too low for the bullet to transit. Op Mock Adjacent shills pretend the physical evidence doesn’t exist.

It’s the height of bad faith to repeatedly ask questions already answered again and again. This is the third or forth time for this — https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/6e/2c/f1/b7f57725cf38b1/US6705194.pdf <q> EXAMPLE 4 The fluid consists of the medicine to be injected into the tissue of the patient. The ice slug containing the exact amount of the medicine to be injected is expelled from the gun so it penetrates into the patent [sic?] body at a precisely controlled site and the medicine is delivered to a patient. EXAMPLE 5 The invented device is used as a traceless gun, firing lethal or non-lethal bullets. After impacting the surface of the substrate the ice bullet is melted and no traces of the bullet remains. </q> You refuse to read the material posted regarding a technology you can’t wrap your head around.

I’ve experienced enough bad faith.

If you can’t bother to read the material I link why would I bother with you?