Cliff Varnell

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

In response to this 

you replied this:

Could you explain how you see the right T1 transverse process hairline fracture and the air pocket as refuting the slight upward and slightly from the right (enough to miss the windshield) trajectory that a shot would have hitting JFK's throat from the front at Z330, and exiting back of the head, fired from the storm drain? 

I asked Barb Junkkarinen what creates the kind of air pocket seen on the x-ray and she said it can occur when the tissue is lightly tapped—“like with a pencil.”

2 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

OK. Are you sure you mean multiple pellets not one for that back shot? How many shots are you talking about for that single hole in JFK's upper back?

One soft tissue wound in the back, one in the neck.

2 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Could you say when you think a pellet in that wound in the back would have been secretly surgically removed prior to the autopsy, and for what purpose?

I’d have to refer you to the work of David Lifton.  There were no bullets recovered from either wound at autopsy.  The pellet scenario requires prior removal.

2 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

How about instead, no secret surgical removal, but, that shot coming from an air gun it did not penetrate the skin fully, and did, as the original Siebert and O'Neil FBI report reconstructed, come out by itself perhaps during the medical procedures at Parkland?

But it did penetrate the skin fully.  And you’ve got two pellets falling out.  From what I understand bullets don’t just fall out of wounds.  I dunno about pellets.

2 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

And as for who would be interested in hitting JFK in the back with a CO2 handgun in the midst of a serious intent to assassinate and kill, perhaps a "decoy" shot from the 6th floor TSBD--the first shot to get people's heads turned that way from the sound toward the sound, toward the TSBD, the first shot that the witnesses said sounded "different" than the others?

Not pellets. The rest of the shots other than the one to JFK's back all from real rifles to kill. (The throat wound maybe an entrance wound from a shot fired at Z330 from the storm drain, exited rear of the head?)

Not according to the cervical x-ray, which shows a hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process, and an air pocket overlaying C7 and T1 — consistent with a frontal throat shot.

2 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

JFK's reaction to being hit in the back that first shot with the air gun, the Thorburn reaction (not from being hit in the throat). 

SSA Bennett wrote on the flight back to DC that JFK was hit in the back right before the head shot.  Since JFK brought his fists up to throat level, it seems apparent he was reacting to a throat strike.  He acted paralyzed, it seems.

Occam’s Razor:  what’s the simplest explanation for someone acting paralyzed?

They *are* paralyzed.

Interesting.  Air gun fatalities.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC500806/

If Putin had a choice, would he have preferred Ukraine in NATO rather than Finland?

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

An air pistol? https://survivalmag.net/best-air-pistols/ 

Pellet guns.  And the pellets were removed prior to the autopsy.

Are there any other cases of assassination by pellets?

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

Thanks, Cliff. You’ve made your feelings clear that you think it was unfair. 

Ukraine give up their nukes in 1994 under the agreement that Russia wouldn't invade. The Budapest Memorandum.  That one didn’t count?

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

No. Its false equivalence on your side, Cliff.
 

You think that a country seeking NATO membership, and wishing to join a  military union, collective of nations, when a peace deal has been signed by that military union (NATO) with Russia, previously decreeing that it will NOT cross the Elbe river,

The chauvinism is egregious.  

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

 

and expand east, is the same as a minority group within a country being ethnically cleansed and crying for help.

Good one. 

Russia routinely engages in ethnic cleansing— and had no right to sign a treaty dictating former Soviet Bloc alliances.  That treaty was chauvinistic, unenforceable (obviously) and contrary to the rights of nations to determine their own alliances.

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

You’re arguing at cross purposes, Cliff. Your frustration should be directed at NATO, the organisation that you want these countries to join. 

They already joined, years ago. Your position is contradictory.  What’s good for the Donbass Russians ain’t good for the Poles?

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

Unfortunately, this is the world we find ourselves in, we have 3 super powers doing exactly that, its corrupt and it isn’t a level playing field. 

The former Soviet Bloc states desired the Western defense umbrella.  You don’t deny the Donbass Russians their right to seek Russia’s help, why should Russia’s neighbors be denied *their* self-determination?  Because Great Powers know better?

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Didn't think so.  

You've chosen to ignore content by Cliff Varnell.

Meltdown complete.

The central question remains — what kind of weapon leaves a shallow wound in soft tissue?

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

 

If you don’t thinK thats a fair deal that NATO signed, then you are welcome to lament it, Cliff.

No, I don’t think Great Powers are entitled to dictate alliances to smaller countries.  The former Soviet Bloc states had plenty to fear of Russia and every right to tell the Great Powers to stick it.

1 hour ago, Chris Barnard said:

 

Just make sure that you are mad at NATO. For signing it and breaking it.  

The peoples of the former Soviet Bloc were entitled to seek the Western defense umbrella.  Ditto Finland and Sweden.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

I'd recommend you ignore me as well Cliff... 

Coming here to have you trot out T3 like an OCD parrot

I think I chimed in on the SBT 3 times in 2020, couple times in 2019, and in 2018 I completed my entrance exam for the Vincent Salandria School of Research into the Obvious.

Buck up, lad.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

and demean the time and work of everyone else to whom you feel morally superior 
has somehow lost its appeal.

Just because I’m a better researcher doesn’t make me morally superior.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Let's see if you can put it down and move on... or has the "compulsive" part taken over?

Haven’t posted on an SBT thread in 3 years, David — I assume your comments are projection.

A question for the gentle reader:  how many times have JFK’s shallow soft tissue wounds been discussed at a JFKA convention?  Or discussed on Black Op Radio, or mentioned by the folks trying to get the case before Congress?

Zero.

Funny, I come here once in a while and cite the root facts — and the micro-analysts melt down.

2 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

. A lot are people of Russian heritage living in the Donbass. It amounts to ‘ethnic cleansing’ by the Ukraine government. These people have been appealing for an intervention from Russia, help, support, and a declaration that they are autonomous for that period. Its their home too. 

The Russian enclaves in Donbass were justified seeking the Russian defense umbrella — but the the former Soviet Bloc states shouldn’t have been allowed to join NATO?

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Thanks Cliff...  its people like you that make life worth living...   

do you spend all day this mad at all us id-jits or do you work yourself into a lather first then come here to post looking for a fight?

I’m here to point out there is no fight.  You can’t challenge the root facts — 2 shallow wounds in soft tissue.  

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Figures you're site is based on Occams razor... you so fooled by 50 years of propaganda that you've bought into the notion the simplest solution is the most correct?

And in the case of the JFKA the simplest solution IS the most correct — and the two-soft-tissue-wounds spotlight MKNAOMI as possible perps, the only real lead in the case.

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Hey, forget these are questions.  Think Rhetorical... you know, like all the other questions discussed here

bu-bye now... you can disengage now and wonder why some other portion of the forum is filled with so many id-jits... 

This presentation of yours has become hackneyed. 

The irony is rich.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

So you offer that 7 people see and entrance wound - fine

That clothes have holes to match the location - agreed

Why must your surety have any bearing on the activities of those on this forum beyond your own self-grandizing?

You want to attribute the clear historical record to me personally?

Why?  What do I have to do with the physical evidence?

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

==

Since you have your convincing evidence, I'm curious why you bother clicking on any SBT thread at all anymore? 

When was the last time I posted on an SBT thread — 2018?

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Just so you can fein moral superiority with your patented " y'all are wasting your time" comments?

Y’all wasting everyone’s time.  Must have hit a nerve.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

To Whom are you trying to ingratiate yourself anyway?

We must face that fact -- and not waste any more time microanalyzing the evidence. 

So take the advice and move on to more important things and maybe stop interrupting others while they have a discussions with people they respect...

Because I think it’s important to point out the pernicious impact of fake debate.  I do this every five years or so.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Besides getting a congressional investigation reconvened which many here are in the process of doing,
friends and colleagues here have nothing but the micro-analysis of the evidence to derive consensus, establish long term relationships and add more points of connectivity within the enormous spiderweb that is this case.

Lawrence and Bill ran the Oswald Mock Trial 2017 and they convinced 5 “jurors” out of 12 that Oswald was innocent.

5 out of 12!

Bang up job, fellas.... If you don’t boil the case down to it’s simplest elements you’re perpetuating the cover-up.

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Who appointed you the forum's SBT top-cop anyway... did you need to fill out an application first?

So you object to getting reminded of the rarely discussed root facts?  YP not MP

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Point well taken, yet that remains only the word of Humes as described by the FBI... the "word" of those around him at Bethesda.
again, not saying the word is inaccurate at all... yet,

Factually incorrect, David.  7 witnesses in a position of authority recorded contemporaneous accounts of the T3 back wound.  SSAs Bennett and Hill, Adm Burkley, and mortician Thomas Robinson (as well as FBI agents Sibert and O’Neill, and James Curtis Jenkins who filled out the autopsy face sheet) all put the wound in the vicinity of T3 — too low to have been associated with the throat wound.

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

We have no physical evidence to back that assertion,

Factually incorrect.  The bullet holes in the clothes match T3, consistent with the half dozen contemporaneous accounts.

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

so what is so wrong with looking at the SBT from other points of view than your own?

Because you surrender to the Big Lie that the issue is in doubt.  Fake debate distracting from the more important question — what kind of ordnance leaves shallow wounds in soft tissue?

It’s not “my” point of view, David, it’s what the historical record shows.

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Of shutting the door with the reality of the angles involved, along with a number of other strong arguments.

An argument that should have been settled in 1966 when Gaeton Fonzi induced Arlen Specter to have a nervous breakdown over the clothing evidence.

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

You've been saying this same thing with what appears to be disdain for anybody else who approaches it differently than you...

It’s the same disdain that I have for claims the earth is flat.

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

for as long as I've been posting here it seems... and you do it with such contempt for the thoughts or work of anyone but you.

Lots of people have worked on the T3 back wound.  It’s not my fault if people can’t grasp its significance.

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

How about a little live and let live and maybe learn a few things you may have not been aware of before...  

I’ll leave the mental masturbation to others.  I prefer to stick to the root facts — JFK had a shallow wound in soft tissue at T3, and a soft tissue wound in his throat, no exit.

What kind of weapon leaves shallow soft tissue wounds?

A pellet gun?

A 25 pound bow and target practice arrows?

The night of the autopsy, with the body in front of them, Humes & Co speculated JFK was hit with a high tech round that left no trace, consistent with the weaponry developed for the CIA’s MKNAOMI at Derrick, MD.

This arguably the most ignored diagnosis in the history of medicine.

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

We've all seen the work, all know what was said about the wound...

And yet you fail to grasp the significance.

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

do you have an xray of that bullet at that spot?

There was no bullet!  That’s the point!

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Any physical evidence at all that proves what you assert beyond all reasonable doubt?

The bullet holes in the clothes are too low to have been associated with the throat wound.  To make the case unnecessarily complex perpetuates the cover-up.

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

How about these for obvious debunking that does not require I know exactly where that bullet was lodged?

There was NO bullet lodged — in the words of Joe Pesci, “Don’t you get it??”

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

 

 

Or even have to care where?

 

Or this farce with a bullet existing his chest instead of rising thru the body at 11 degrees?

Maybe if you could step back off of people's necks if they offer the "non-Varnell SBT-was-impossible conclusion"

Vincent Salandria and Gaston Fonzi spearheaded this research.  I second Salandria’s contempt for researchers who don’t grasp root facts.

3 hours ago, David Josephs said:

We can have discourse and discussion about these other thoughts without incurring the "wrath of Cliff" for suggesting anything but your soft tissue solution consensus every single time the SBT comes up.

It’s not my “soft tissue” solution, it’s what the physical evidence and the contemporaneous accounts of witnesses in position of authority prove.

The First Day evidence leads to the gates of Fort Derrick as a matter of inquiry.

The overly complex material y’all obsess over leads down rabbits holes to no where.

JFK suffered a shallow wound in the soft tissue between T3 and the upper margin of his right shoulder blade.

Why do people insist on debunking the SBT otherwise?

These involved analyses of the Zfilm or CE399 serve to perpetuate the cover-up by making an impossible scenario a matter of debate.

5 hours ago, John Cotter said:

I'm still here, Cliff.

You previously indicated otherwise:  “I don’t have any more time or energy to go through it all again.”  Odd comment when *you* were the one who brought up The Bear and accused people of running away from the issue.

5 hours ago, John Cotter said:

It's just that there are worlds beyond your time zone where people have different circadian rhythms.

Fair enough.  I think you need to re-work your metaphor.  In 2014 Obama and pro-Western Ukrainians poked the Bear at Maidan Square and Putin ripped an arm off — Crimea.  

He should have been satisfied with that. Crimea had been part of Russia for 160 years or so with a majority Russian population.  I think that annexation was justified.  Russia kept its Black Sea port at Sevastopol, and Ukraine had a pro-Western government in line with the wishes of its people.

But in 2022 Putin sought to destroy the rest of Ukraine with no justification.  Now he’s looking at Finland in NATO.  Slick move, Vlad!

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

Are ye still here? I thought ye'd be half way to Ukraine by now. Cowards!

Said the guy who called people out — then ran away when it got too hot.

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

Since ye seem so outraged by the evil, evil Putin 

That you’re *not* outraged is telling — &sickening.

Run like a scalded cat, indeed.

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

@W. Niederhut, @Cliff Varnell and @Sandy Larsen,

We’ve debated this ad nauseam elsewhere, so I’ll be as brief as possible here.

Putin’s Realpolitik approach to foreign policy and – to some extent – to internal Russian politics has been elucidated by Professor John Mearsheimer among others. I find Mearsheimer’s analysis generally persuasive.

Putin’s ruthlessness in respect of internal Russian politics is probably best explained by the long list of “undesirable” foreign leaders assassinated or targeted for assassination by the CIA down through the years.

https://brutalproof.net/2019/11/cias-assassination-list/

I remember reading somewhere about Che Guevara advising Fidel Castro that having an open society in Cuba would be suicidal in view of the USA’s policy of global dominance involving the assassination of “undesirable” foreign leaders, regime change and so on.

In view of all of this and the USA’s internal kleptocratic political regime – not to mention its being accessory to the assassinations of its own political leaders in the 1960s – I find moralistic finger-pointing at Russia by sanctimonious Americans and westerners generally quite sickening.

I protested the Vietnam War in the early 70’s, the Grenada invasion in ‘83 (watched an American flag burned at the intersection of Shattuck and University Aves in Berkeley), the first Iraq invasion in ‘91, and a dozen demonstrations against the ‘03 Iraq War.  I denounce all forms of “regime change” including Putin’s unprovoked aggression against Ukraine.  If you find that sanctimonious— that’s *your* problem.

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

I know it's an extremely complex metaphor, Cliff, but I'll do my best to explain it.

Not complex, it’s silly.

1 hour ago, John Cotter said:

Ukraine is the arm.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/01/12/putin-russia-us-missile-defense-nato-ukraine/

Putin said his special operation was to “de-N-a-z-ify” Ukraine — amidst missile negotiations with the West.

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Nice one John.

The USA ruling class does not want the Cold War to end, ever.  And I mean ever.

Ever?

2014:  Obama and Putin arrange the destruction of the Syria’s chemical weapons stockpile.

The Neo-cons hated it.

2015:  the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, France, China, Germany and the European Union negotiated strong restrictions on the Iranian nuclear program.

The Neo-cons hated it.

2016:  Obama visited Cuba.

The Neo-cons hated it.

2021:  Biden pulled out of Afghanistan, etc.

This is not to distract from the Other Side of the Dem Prez ledger— inevitably mistaken regime change policies in Ukraine, Libya, Honduras — and the drone bombing of civilians in many countries.

Trump pulled out of the Iran nuke deal and moved the US Embassy to Jerusalem— much to the delight of Neo-cons.

Anyone who claims Trump is an opponent of the Deep State doesn’t grasp the factional nature of the “USA ruling class.”

On 4/20/2023 at 5:46 PM, Leslie Sharp said:

Valentine offers a very persuasive theory, imo. 

Doug Valentine on the recent documents leak: 

"I have no doubt the documents are genuine, but I believe the leak was a function of the culture war that is tearing America apart. That a general loyal to Donald Trump and the MAGA movement leaked the documents in an attempt to undermine the Biden administration and promote the Trump policy of rapprochement with Russia. The Biden administration is attempting to spin the leak, but the political/cultural rift within the military and CIA, as well within federal law enforcement, is the real story. America is in the midst of a psychological civil war, as I say in my forthcoming book Pisces Moon: The Dark Arts of Empire.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XhSJZOrZCuyoUWHU0jUNeMERtxy7dAui/view?ts=643ec28b&fbclid=IwAR3CzYa9OzlTMyioEsXFFsE02YUx15P0v6M9ohrpbl94DGHT_f_7AzHVd_E

 

It’s refreshing to read an accurate analysis of the faction ridden American ruling elite.  The “real story” Doug Valentine lays out is little understood in this country — and not grasped at all by those who live elsewhere.

2 hours ago, John Cotter said:

The question that Putin haters and Russophobes run away from like scalded cats:

If you keep poking a bear and the bear eventually reacts by tearing off your arm, who’s to blame?

Ukraine poked the bear...how?