Cliff Varnell

Once the payout is made, the action is over, right?I was hoping you'd shoot down the "metallic debris" scenario -- it depends on the blood soluble technology not working the way it was designed. Let's put all the original sources discussed in this thread into one post. Start with that great shining moment, after the autopsy and before the FBI Magic Bullet cover-up kicked in. From the signed affidavit of FBI SA James Sibert: From the signed affidavit of FBI SA Francis O'Neill: The FBI cover-up began with Sibert's call to Killion to ask about blood soluble rounds, where he learned instead of the magic bullet. Sibert made that call to FBI HQ to follow-up on the autopsists' "general feeling" that the back wound was caused by a hi-tech weapon. It was the one point in the case where the perps were in the sight. And in fact, such hi-tech weaponry did exist. William Colby, Church Comm. testimony, September 16, 1975 (emphasis added) Charles Senseney before the Church Committee, Sept. 18, 1975: Tested on humans, this paralytic acted within two seconds, wouldn't show up on x-ray, had the size of a .22. Here's the HSCA examination of JFK's thoracic x-rays: For the "metallic debris field" to have been the result of the failure of WerBell's rounds to fully dissolve, one must also posit fakery in the pre-autopsy x-ray, a possibility that can never be dismissed. Both the pre- and post- autopsy x-rays show the bruised lung tip, the hairline fracture of the tip of the T1 transverse process, and and an air pocket. It is the air pocket, rather than any metallic debris, that is the true signature of Mitchell WerBell III.

One finger points, three fingers point back.

Charles Carrico, WC: (quote on) Mr. SPECTER - Who was the first doctor to reach President Kennedy on his arrival at Parkland Hospital? Dr. CARRICO - I was. Mr. SPECTER - And who else was with President Kennedy on his arrival, as best you can recollect it? Dr. CARRICO - Mrs. Kennedy was there, and there were some men in the room, who I assumed were Secret Service men; I don't know. (quote off) And what did the Secret Service report? From his original written report, Roy Kellerman: (quote on) When we got to the hospital I called to the agents to get two stretchers. The special agents of the follow-up car with the police ran into the hospital, obtained two stretchers on wheels. We placed the Governor on the first one at which time I noticed he was conscious and I spoke to him saying, "Governor, everything is going to be all right." His eyes were wide open and he nodded his head in agreement. Just before we removed the President, SA Hill took off his coat, placed it over the President's head and chest and we placed him on the stretcher. Both were taken into separate emergency rooms. The hospital staff appeared quickly and went immediately to work. I accompanied the President to the emergency room. (quote off) From Will Greer's original Secret Service report: (quote on, emphasis added) I drove as fast as I could to the hospital and helped to get the President into the emergency room. I guarded the emergency room door until the doctors and nurses had completed their duty. (quote off)

And who made this utterly false claim? I recall saying that it shouldn't be hard to put together such a timeline. I cited witness testimony describing Jackie, Kellerman and Greer being with the body from the limo to TR1, at the arrival of Carrico and Henchliffe. At no time did I say this was definitive. If you wanted to challenge me on this point, Ashton, why didn't you at the time? If you can develop a more accurate time-line concerning those three individuals being with the body -- or not -- until the arrival of Carrico and Henchliffe in TR1 I'd be very grateful to see it.

Bingo! Thank you, Ron. I would expand a little on your last points -- first the diversionary shots, then the paralytics, then the bullets. Occam's Razor, indeed. Why assume anything? The evidence is clearly there, the throat and back wounds are consistent with un-conventional firearms, and JFK's reaction is utterly consistent with a paralytic strike. {quote] Cliff This as unscientific a post as I have ever read. There is NOTHING that is indicative of anything other than a throat wound as was reported by the only persons qualified to know. I agree with you! Wholeheartedly! The round Charles Senseney described in his 1975 Senate testimony was almost the size of a .22. I'm just saying that JFK appears to act paralyzed, that Jackie appears to bepulling on him with no effect, and this observed behavior is consistent with being paralyzed. I don't look for conclusions in strands of evidence -- I look for consistencies that may lead to a reasonable conclusion. fwiw... All I know is what the original sources tell me. That's what I've cited The affidavits of the 2 FBI guys establishes, as far as I'm concerned, the serious thought the 3 autopsists and the 2 feds gave to blood soluble rounds being the cause of JFK's back wound. Melton's book of CIA gadgets establishes the existence of projectiles that didn't show up on x-ray. Senseney and Colby testified that this technology used a round almost the size of a .22, this was tested on humans, and the round could not be indentified on x-ray. All of this can be found in my posts on this thread....Do you read what I write? I have never entered this debate, I want nothing to do with this debate, pleasedo not attempt to ascribe to me anything to do with Zap film alteration. Please. I have no idea who or what you're talking about. I wish you would address my actual points and cites if you're going to chide me...That's not too much to ask, right? I have absolutely no idea what you're driving at...Everyday Ashton Gray insinuatesI'm in league with the JFK Cover-Up because I cite the credibility of the Parkland staff and now you're going to accuse me of the very thing I've pushed back against. Give me a xxxxing break, okay? I always stick up for the staffs of BOTH Parkland and Bethesda, so I have no idea what you're talking about. I'm asking you politely not to attribute to me ideas I find repugnant.

Here's Ashton's dressed corpse... Note that the tie knot rests at the base of the adams apple. Here's a live JFK with his head in a neutral position: How much more obvious can it be that JFK didn't wear his tie knot at the base of his adams apple?

Sorry you overlooked all that I've been posting about. Sorry you overlooked the title of the thread. It asks a question. Several folks chimed in with their take on YOUR question. I am one of those folks. Sorry if we gave our own views precedent over yours, Ashton, but you don't have a proprietary hold on where the thread goes in relation to the answers to YOUR question, now, do you? My answer to YOUR question is this: The back wound was the result of a blood soluble round fired from the Dal-Tex at Z227 that helped to paralyze JFK, or perhaps deliver a fatal toxin. I'll argue that this reasonable conclusion is well supported in the medical evidence, the witness testimony, and the Dealey Plaza photo evidence. Please see my post #33 on this thread for my take on the historical significance of all three autopsists and the two FBI guys concluding it highly likely that Kennedy's back wound was created by a weapon known only to the intelligence community. Don't ask questions if you can't take the answer, Ashton. btw, I love the way you fell for the "metallic debris field" hook, line, and sinker. I can't wait to see what support for my case you come up with! Until then... William Colby, Church Comm. testimony, September 16, 1975: (quote on, emphasis added) The specific subject today concerns the CIA's involvement in the development of bacteriological warfare materials with the Army's Biological Laboratory at Fort Detrick, CIA's retention of an amount of shellfish toxin, and CIA's use and investigation of various chemicals and drugs. . . . A large amount of Agency attention was given to the problem of incapacitating guard dogs. Though most of the dart launchers were developed for the Army, the Agency did request the development of a small, hand-held dart launcher for its peculiar needs for this purpose. Work was also done on temporary human incapacitation techniques. These related to a desire to incapacitate captives before they could render themselves incapable of talking, or terrorists before they could take retaliatory action.... Church: Is it not true, too, that the effort not only involved designing a gun that could strike at a human target without knowledge of the person who had been struck, but also the toxin itself would not appear in the autopsy? Colby: Well there was an attempt-- Church: Or the dart? Colby: Yes; so there was no way of perceiving that the target was hit. (quote off) Charles Senseney before the Church Committee, Sept. 18, 1975: (quote on) I worked in the Biological Warfare Section of Fort Detrick from 1953. . . . I was the project engineer of the M-1 dart launcher and following on microorganism projectiles and so forth. [Church staffer] Smothers: Is this a device that looks roughly like a .45 caliber pistol with a sight mount at the top? Senseney: This was a follow-on. It was to replace the M-1 projectile to go into the Army stockpile. It did look like a .45. Smothers: Did the CIA have, Mr. Senseney, the wherewithal to utilize this dart launcher against humans? Senseney: No, they asked for a modification to use against a dog. Now, these were actually given to them, and they were actually expended, because we got all of the hardware back. For a dog, the projectile had to be made many times bigger. It was almost the size of a .22 cartridge, but it carried a chemical compound known as 46-40.... (quote off) The following facts are established. The CIA experimented on humans with a round the size of a .22. This is a lot larger than the round described in Melton (see my post #33 this thread). As per Melton, this round WOULD NOT SHOW UP ON X-RAY

This appears to be true, i.e. the WC lied about a bullet going through the front of JFK's shirt. There is no bullet hole in the front of the shirt, only slits that were caused by a scalpel, not a bullet. So the "claimed location" of the wound is a government lie. Ron, according to Ashton's photoshopped Autopsy Suit JFK's tie knot was at the base of his adams apple. This is clearly not a fact.

Bingo! Thank you, Ron. I would expand a little on your last points -- first the diversionary shots, then the paralytics, then the bullets. Occam's Razor, indeed. Why assume anything? The evidence is clearly there, the throat and back wounds are consistent with un-conventional firearms, and JFK's reaction is utterly consistent with a paralytic strike.

Ashton, You have the wrong idea about what is going on here. I've worked on this evidence for 15 years and I'm presenting it now. I don't present at conferences and I don't have a website. I'm underground, dude, and have been since I brought left-wing hardcore punk rock into Reno NV back in 1980. You are a wonderful foil. Don't take it personally. Aren't you over-looking the statements of another half-dozen people -- two reportswritten 11/22/63 -- that corroborate the throat entrance wound? And how do you explain the x-ray that shows a hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process and that metallic debris field? You can have Perry and Bowron. Let's dismiss them. Agreed. I will never cite either one of them in any discussion with you (not necessarily others) but with you, Ashton Gray, they are dead to our discussions. Satisfied? Now, back to the evidence... But don't you say this evidence never existed? How could he destroy something that didn't exist? And if it did exist, what created it if not a shot? Whoa whoa! YOU brought this xxxx up!YOU asked me a question - I gave you an answer to that question. If you don't like my answers then don't ask the question. Bowron and Perry are scoundrels and off with their heads. Now, what about the testimony of Carrico (written that day), Jones (written that day), Henchliffe, Baxter, Akin and Crenshaw? They all described a wound of entrance in the throat. And then the other issue you seem to regard as garlic before Bela is the x-ray evidence of the metallic debris field at the point of deepest penetration as well as the minor internal injuries to the trachea and the lung.

Malcolm Perry's testimony under oath: MALCOLM PERRY: In the lower part of the neck below the Adams apple was a small, roughly circular wound of perhaps 5 mm. in diameter from which blood was exuding slowly. ...I asked Dr. Carrico if the wound on the neck was actually a wound or had he begun a tracheotomy and he replied in the negative, that it was a wound... Under oath, Malcolm Perry says he didn't know whether what he saw in the neck was a wound, or the start of a tracheotomy. To the press, and to the world, in the most crucial moments, Malcolm Perry proclaimed unequivocally that there was an "entrance wound" in the neck. So did Malcolm Perry lie to the press, or did Malcolm Perry lie under oath, or both? Why did nurse Diana Bowron—the person who first got to John F. Kennedy at the limo and accompanied him into Trauma Room One, and was there throughout—lie about the throat wound? Why did Malcolm Perry—the man who destroyed all evidence of the throat wound—lie about it? Ashton Gray Ashton, you don't seem to appreciate the pressure these people were under. Bowron said that when she returned to her prior duties after cleaning the body for the casket, Johnson's entourage was there. As Johnson moved past Bowron he turned to Lady Bird and said, "Take down everything anyone says or does," (paraphrasing). Imagine if you were a 22 year old foreigner in country only recently and the larger than life now President of the United States says to his wife right in your face, "Take down everything anyone says or does." I bet you might give it the Sgt. Schultz, eh? Or would you be like Sam Holland? He stuck to his guns -- four shots -- no matter what. The other day I had to fill out this form and they asked me who my favorite person from history...I said Sam Holland. But you and I will never have to face what Holland and Bowron went through, Ashton. Don't you think you should have something a little more solid than a hunch before making these kinds of accusations?

The right side of the trachea was nicked, the right tip of the lung was bruised, there was a hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process, right next to a metallic debris field. The 5 professionals at Bethesda thought it likely a blood soluble round that would be known only in the intelligence community. The Dealey Plaza photo evidence shows JFK acting paralyzed. Points right to the CIA.

We have our hands around yet another twosie: It was veteran FBI agent Sibert (of "orange-sized hole in back center of head" fame) who introduced the idea of a magic dissolving projectile—but in relation to the back wound, not the throat wound (which, by the time Sibert saw the body, had been conveniently hacked out of existence by Malcolm Perry). This was a crucial moment in history. It was after the autopsy, and Humes, Boswell and Finck huddled to discuss the implications of the wounds they saw, the FBI guys with their ears on the conversation. From the signed affidavit of FBI SA James Sibert: (quote on) I recall the doctors looking for a bullet in the body in connection with the back wound and becoming frustrated during their search. They probed the wound with a finger and Dr. Finck probed it with a metal probe. They concluded that the wound went in only so far and they couldn't find the bullet. It was my impression that both Finck and Humes agreed that there was no exit wound of the bullet through the back. 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... (quote off) Did such blood soluble technology exist at that time? CIA SPECIAL WEAPONS AND EQUIPMENT by H. Keith Melton, 1965 (forward by Richard Helms), pg 22: (quote on) DART GUN The dart gun is a single-shot pistol firing a.03-caliber, mass stabilized projectile...made of iron particles and the tranquilizer M-99 formed together with a blood/water soluble bonding agent... If left in the body, the dartdissolves and becomes unidentifiable on X-ray. An adjustable shoulder stock is available as an accessory (must be obtained seperately) for operations requiring ranges up to 100 feet. (quote off) From the signed affidavit of FBI SA Francis O'Neill: (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. There was no real sense either way that the wounds were caused by the same kind of bullet. (quote off) What's interesting here is that the autopsists and the FBI guys -- the professionals on the scene, before any official story was thrust upon them -- took it as a very serious possibility that the medical evidence was consistent with a weapon that would only be known within the intelligence community. http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/r..._6_Senseney.pdf Those 5 guys had the CIA on the spot at that very moment in time right before Sibert went to call FBI HQ for info on blood soluble rounds. The answer from FBI HQ -- the Magic Bullet solved the puzzle. Well, not really.

Dr. Malcolm Perry's news conference, 11/22/63 (well before the formation of the Warren Commission): (quote on) There was an entrance wound in the neck...It appeared to be coming at him... The wound appeared to be an entrance wound in the front of the throat; yes, that is correct...The exit wound I don't know. It could have been the head or there could have been a second wound of the head. (quote off) The seeker of fact weighs the evidence judiciously. One autopsy photo has been cited, the Stare of Death with that big ugly trach incision. The size of that incision is inconsistent with another autopsy photo -- left lateral -- that appears to show a smaller, neater wound. http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/index.html The size of the SOD wound is inconsistent with some Parkland witness testimony, most notably Dr. Perry's insistence that the trach incision was sufficient to put in the tube and no bigger. Weigh the value of the SOD with the value of the x-ray described in this HSCA report: According to the HSCA: (quote on) In the post autopsy film of the thoracic region there is debris in the radiographic image superimposed over the area to the right of the C7 vertebral body. (quote off) This metallic debris is consistent with a shot from the throat with a blood soluble round using iron particles as a bonding agent. Say hello to our little friend, because that debris field is 95% likely to be his signature... http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKwerbell.htm

I was under the impression your bullet track ended many inches higher in the brain. And your scenario does not account for the metallic debris in the vicinity of T1. And I do not find the first-shot/kill-shot approach a likely strategy. I agree wholeheartedly. They had not yet heard the 1975 testimony of Charles Senseney, William Colby, and Richard Helms to the effect that the CIA had a weapon that fired a round about the size of a .22 that induced paralysis within 2 seconds. I agree. Where we diverge is over the nature of the round and its firing position. I wholeheartedly disagree. I think it highly "improbable" that a conventional .22 round struck only soft tissue and then stopped at the tip of the T1 transverse process. The non-exiting rounds are consistent with blood soluble bullets -- as is the metallic debris field at the point of deepest penetration of the throat wound. CIA SPECIAL WEAPONS AND EQUIPMENT by H. Keith Melton, pg 22: (quote on, emphasis added) DART GUN The dart gun is a single-shot pistol firing a .03-caliber, mass stabilized projectile...made of iron particles and the tranquilizer M-99 formed together with a blood/water soluble bonding agent...If left in the body, the dart dissolves and becomes unidentifiable on X-ray. (quote off) According to Senseney's Senate testimony the bigger the target the larger the round, which would account for the metallic debris field showing up on x-ray. It seems like the only probable explanation for two wounds and no bullets, the internal damage noted at Parkland and Bethesdsa, and JFK's paralysis many of us note in the Elm St. films/photos. The scenario I have laid out takes into account the extant first day witness testimonies,the photographic evidence, the medical evidence, and JFK's photographed reactions to being hit. I'll argue that this is the ONLY scenario that accounts for every facet of the evidence, and is well-supported by research indicating a high probability that people connected to the CIA were involved. My sentiments exactly, for the reasons I've already stated.

Correct. But the plotters would not assume he wouldn't duck, would they? Are you going to bet your life on (1) a guaranteed first-shot/kill-shot given the circumstances, or (2) that he would not duck if struck with a non-fatal round? I wouldn't, not if I had another option that was available to any CIA-connected plotters. That's not the point. There was no need for the plotters to make any kind ofassumption when they had the technology to paralyze the guy first. Because he was the one that was hit. Gave him a bit more motivation, doncha think? I doubt if he knew what hit him, if his wife read him correctly. The guy getting hit would react faster than a guy guarding him. Charles Senseny developed blood soluble rounds that paralyzed dogs within 2 seconds,rendering them unable to bark. Less than 2 seconds was required for the paralyzation to take effect, and the shot to the throat stunned JFK sufficiently for this to take place. However you wish to characterize it.... No, I think the plotters regarded a first-shot/kill-shot as problematic and addressedthe problem in the most efficient manner possible. Shoot'n a duck ain't treason -- unless yer at Disneyland... I'm not out to change your mind, to be honest, I'm only arguing a position. My scenario fits the following medical evidence: 1) shallow back wound 2) small throat entrance wound 3) the nick to the right side of the trachea 4) the bruised right lung tip 5) the hairline fracture of the tip of the T1 transverse process 6) and most importantly, the metallic debris field a the point of deepest penetration.

Hi Charles Because a first-shot/kill-shot was not 100% guaranteed.What if the shooters only wing the guy with the first shot and he ducks down? Why wouldn't the plotters account for that contingency? And if the shooters were going for a first-shot/kill-shot -- why did it take so long? I don't buy the Umbrella Man scenario. The pop-up/pop-down actions of Black Dog Manare utterly consistent with a shooter, imo. What is more practical than insuring a kill shot by paralyzing the target?It's worked for scorpions for eons... And this scenario fits all the witness testimony and the medical record. I think it's "normal" for an ex-military man to hit the deck when he's struck.I don't see how any well-thought-out assassination would fail to take this into consideration. What did Jackie say to her husband after he was struck? "What are they doing to you?" Not -- "You've been hit!" or "He's been shot!" She said he looked "quizzical." Both the shot to the throat and the back were non-fatal, and yet this man with military training made no move to get out of the line of fire. He certainly looks paralyzed to me, and maybe I'm too simplistic, but if he acted paralyzed he probably was paralyzed.

Or a blood soluble paralytic fired from the Dal-Tex at Z227, from a firearm designed by Mitchell WerBell III, following a shot to the throat with a similar blood soluble round fired from the Black Dog Man position at Z197. Most scenarios assume the shooters were going for a first-shot/kill-shot, and the hits to the back and throat were misses. I disagree. The plotters had a contingency problem, firing on a subject in a moving car, an ex-Navy man at that, who might be expected to duck down if struck with an initial non-fatal round. The plotters also had to consider the possibility that the shooters, committing treason as well as murder, might be a tad nervous. First-shot/kill-shot was not a guaranteed result. Since JFK acted paralyzed in the Dealey Plaza photo evidence, the simplest explanation is that he was paralyzed. So the first two rounds to strike him contained not only a paralytic, but some kind of fatal toxin, as well, I'd speculate. This scenario matches the witness testimony, the medical record of the back and throat wounds, the photographic evidence, and the historical record as to the existence of this technology. The technology existed to paralyze a man within two seconds -- why wouldn't they use it? http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/r..._6_Senseney.pdf

More evidence of early CIA involvement with George Bush and Zapata Offshore... http://realnews.org/rn/content/zapata.html I especially like this line: That's all Bush ever had with Zapata -- a modest bottom line. It's interesting that the Bush interests settled out with the Liedtkes by giving the Texas boys the actual oil production company -- Zapata Petroleum, which became very successful -- while the Bush clan got Zapata Offshore, which wasn't much of a success at all unless they used it as a front for smuggling operations. I'll bet Harriman/Bush got the best end of the stick when all was said and done.

Reality check: The Gulf of Tonkin Incident occured on August 2 and 4, 1964. The Senate passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution on August 7, 1964. I know they taught you in civics that only Congress can "declare war," Ashton, but you might notice that it doesn't seem to work that way in the real world. Reality check: who was calling the shots in American foreign policy in 1963?A guy named W. Averell Harriman. You've heard of him. The Harrimans and Bushes were thick as thieves. Harriman money was well invested in George Bush's Zapata Offshore oil exploration company Harriman may have been aware, I'd speculate, that a whole lot of stuff was being smuggled on and off Zapata's mobile oil drilling rig (the Scorpion) 57 miles off the coast of Cuba in the Florida Straights because maintenance runs from the platform to Florida, about 65 miles away, were not subject to a customs check. This is pure speculation on my part, but I find it reasonable to conclude that the guys who financed the Nazi war machine (Harriman/Bush) would not hesitate to help fuel a heroin epidemic in the urban US in the 50's. In the interest of intellectual honesty, I cannot condemn the amount of marijuna they smuggled into our country, but the heroin, yes. I also find it a reasonable speculation that if these guys were doing it, others in the oil industry were doing it, as well. From George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography --- by Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin http://www.tarpley.net/bush8.htm In 1963, I'll argue, Harriman and his business partner Prescott Bush thought they could cut more exclusive smuggling deals with Castro using Zapata Offshore platforms for the Cuba-to-Florida smuggling funnel Castro, chafing under the Soviets, was eager to negotiate. The Texas boys called bullxxxx, to put it simply, and killed JFK in a last ditch bid to win a open-smuggling-friendly Cuban government by blaming Castro and invading the island. Castro could never trust the Americans again. I'd speculate that George Bush, eager to get into Texas politics, sided with HL Hunt et al, against the wishes of his father -- ironically echoed decades later by Dubya going against GHWB's wishes on Iraq. Thank you, Ashton.

Robin, Nick, Tom Thank you, gentlemen. I've run out of "A" tickets for this particular Parlor Game ride.

And on what basis do you impeach the two contemporaneous reports and the 6 other witness statements to the effect there was an entrance wound in his throat? You impeach all these people by disputing Diana Bowron?

The Cuban angle was spiked along time before that! Paul Here's where we diverge. Had Oswald been gunned down as (I'd speculate) planned -- Mickey and Minnie would be knocking back virgin Cuba Libres at the Havana Disneyland, as we speak...

I'm curious what significance is found in Bowron's WC mis-statements. When was Jackie Kennedy, Will Greer, and Roy Kellerman NOT with the body after the arrival at Parkland?

Good point, Michael. She mis-spoke, clearly. Here's what Henchliffe had to say about the visibility of the throat wound, from her WC testimony: (quote on) Mr. SPECTER. Was the wound on the front of the neck surrounded by any blood? Miss HENCHLIFFE. No, sir. Mr. Specter. Was there any blood at all in that area? Miss HENCHLIFFE. No, sir. (quote off) I find it hard to believe that Bowron did not see the throat wound. I find it easier to buy the notion that she mis-stated out of nervousness, since on every other point her testimony seems corroborated.