Cliff Varnell

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?

This is the kind of static I referred to in an earlier post. No matter how many times a question is answered the Op Mock Adjacent shills pretend otherwise. <quote on, emphasis added> Q: Were there frequent transfers of material between Dr. Gordon's office and your office, either the hardware or the toxin? Senseney: The only frequent thing that changed hands was the dog projectile and its loaders, 4640. This was done maybe five or six in one quantity. And maybe 6 weeks to 6 months later they would bring those back and ask for five or six more. They would bring them back expended, that is, they bring all the hardware except the projectile, OK? Q: Indicating that they have been used? Senseney: Correct. ...Q: How much time usually elapsed between the time you gave them these weapons and the time they brought them back to you expended? Senseney: Usually 5 to 6 weeks. <quote off> You refuse to acknowledge the shallow back wound but you somehow know the size of the wound? From which orifice did you pull this? Water wasn’t the only ingredient. Have you bothered to look at Figure 8 in the patent materials I posted earlier?

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_6_Senseney.pdf

We’ve been over and over this. How many times do I have to cite the same Church Committee testimony of Charles Senseney and William Colby? No, there were many such devices built for specific operations. For a target at a greater distance the round had to be heavier. So does figure 8 in the patent page cited above .

How do you know? And so what? The CIA put it into production MKNAOMI used the technology regularly. I don’t see any evidence you can process information contrary to your pet theories.

They’re French spies off the clock. When they visit the Pentagon SCIF next week the cabana won’t come up.

Did the major perp in the cover-up sign his work? The 11/25/1966 LIFE also ran a Hugh Sidey puff piece on ...W. Averell Harriman. ”Ave — a durable servant of four Presidents” On the contents page that article follows “A Matter of Reasonable Doubt”

Mic drop

They’re spies on vacation.

Jet Energy, Inc. of New Jersey held a patent on exactly that type of weapon until 2022. 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>

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_6_Senseney.pdf <quote on, emphasis added> Senseney: And the only thing that I can say is, I just have to suppose that, having been told to maintain the sort of show and tell display of hardware that we had on sort of stockpile for them, these were not items that could be used. They were display items like you would see in a museum, and they used those to show to the agents as well as to the FBI, to acquaint them with possible ways that other people could attack our own people. (pg 163) Baker: ...There are about 60 agencies of Government that do either intelligence or law enforcement work. Senseney: I am sure most all of those knew of what we were doing; yes... ...The FBI never used anything. They were only shown so they could be aware of what might be brought into the country. </q

The Fort Dertrick guys prepped the FBI to pin exotic weapons on the Commies.