Will public interest in the JFK assassination die after 11/22/2013?

[Cliff Varnell]

Hi Cliff, -

The JFK Assassination Research Community is losing a generation.

Kids tune out because, in the words of one 25-year old I spoke with, "They make it so boring."

I had two conversations with this 25-year old, a young lady from New England as rock-ribbed as any of her generation.

I mentioned the "central issue" of the JFK assassination to her and she insisted I say what it was.

"JFK had a wound of entrance in the back, without an exit. There was no bullet recovered at the autopsy. He had a wound of entrance in his throat, without an exit. No bullet recovered during the autopsy."

She didn't know what to make of it, at first.

"Some people think the bullets were removed prior to the autopsy--" I said.

"--Or it was some government xxxx that dissolved!" she said, excited.

I had a wide smile at that one.

THERE'S ALSO A SCENE IN THE FILM 'THREE DAYS OF THE CONDOR' (I DON'T KNOW IF ITS IN THE BOOK 7 DAYS OF CONDOR) - WHERE THE CIA ANALYSISTS PAID TO READ FICTION - DISCUSS A SIMILAR CASE, AND THE ROBERT REDFORD CHARACTER SOLVED IT - ICE BULLETS. AND WHERE DID HE GET THAT FROM? HIS ASSOCIATES WANT TO KNOW. AND HE SAYS - DICK TRACY - (A COMIC CHARACTER) - AND VERY UNDERRATED DETECTIVE. AND HOWARD ROFFMAN WAS YOUNGER THAN 26 WHEN HE WROTE "PRESUMED GUILTY," SO MAYBE ONLY YOUNG PEOPLE GET IT.

Right. Dick Tracy. Get Smart. 007.

To the members of the older generation the notion that JFK was struck with high-tech weaponry seems silly.

But give the basic facts to a Millennial and that possibility may appear obvious to them.

This was a teachable moment for me.

I marveled how a 25 year old kid -- armed with the bare, root facts of the murder of JFK -- could figure out the central issue of the case pretty much all on her own.

Either the bullets were removed prior to the autopsy, or it was some government xxxx that dissolved.

Both of those possibilities are addressed in the historical record of the autopsy -- pre-autopsy surgery, and high-tech weapons strikes with rounds that didn't show up on x-ray.

She put it together after one moment of serious thought.

Compare her reaction to the Wecht Conference.

She was previously dis-interested in the case but was able to grasp the core issues with a moment of serious thought.

At the Wecht conference there was a collective research experience measured in multiple millennia. All those films and books and articles and papers and lectures and presentations.

And yet the core issue of JFK's murder was never addressed. If the participants of the 2013 Wecht Conference understood the first thing about the murder of JFK, apparently no one demonstrated it.

CLIFF, WERE YOU AT THE WECHT CONFERENCE? HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT WAS DISCUSSED AND WHAT WASN'T? YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN THERE.

Yes, Bill, I know what was discussed in regard to the ending of JFK's life -- the head wounds.

If the question -- "What happened to the bullets that caused the throat and back wounds?" -- was honestly dealt with I'd be more than happy to stand corrected.

I asked you to keep on eye on that, remember? Other than Wecht dishonestly referring to it once -- was the issue addressed, or not?

But JFK's legacy? Aspects of the cover-up?

These issues are dealt with in a first rate manner. Bravo those presentations regarding those issues!

But went it comes to the killing of JFK, the Wecht Symposium (and the JFK Critical Community in general) had its head so stuck in JFK's unknowable cranial wounds it'll never see light again.

WELL I THINK YOU'RE THE ONE FULL OF CRAP - MAKING ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED AND YOU WEREN'T THERE

I raised hell about you guys not addressing the throat/back wounds well before the Symposium opened. I asked people to report back to me on whether or not the throat/back wounds were dealt with.

After the Pittsburg gathering the hot topic of conversation was the head wounds.

I know you didn't miss this excitement, Bill, since you weighed in on it, iirc.

If the throat/back wounds were honestly addressed, at Wecht, you guys are keeping it a secret...

So, how could one moment of serious thought by a 25 year old Burning Man enthusiast trump the Wecht Symposium in its entirety?

Because she was born in 1988. All she has known is high-tech. A high-tech explanation for any event is the norm.

The headline -- "Probable High-Tech Killing of JFK" would not scare her -- but the possibility scares the gray-beards at Wecht into cul de sacs of head wound irrelevance.

Older people think they won't be taken seriously if they look at a high-tech solution.

All the Millenials need are the facts, and they can figure it out for themselves.

But for that to happen the JFK Critical Research Community must EARN their attention.

That didn't happen at Wecht.

HOW DO YOU KNOW?

Because very few showed up on Saturday, when there wasn't a scholastic obligation.

What does that tell you?

THERE WERE HUNDREDS OF HIGH SCHOOL AND COLLEGE STUDENTS THERE AND WECHT WAS JUST THREE DAYS WHILE WE ARE STILL WORKING.

I THINK ITS YOUR RESPONSIBILTY TO GET THE NEXT GENERATION INTERESTED, AND YOU'RE NOT DOING A VERY GOOD JOB OF IT

It's not the next generation that's the problem, Bill.

The kids are alright.

It's the old-timers who can't see the forest for the trees in this case and conduct a three day conference without once honestly getting to the core issue of the killing.

Therein lies the problem.

Edited October 27, 2013 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

dupe

Edited October 27, 2013 by Cliff Varnell

[William Kelly]

I object to anyone saying that those who were at the conference has their head up their butt.

Why would it seem silly to grey beards that a ice bullet would be used, when the same notion was expressed more than once?

As David Talbot put it, JFK said in his inaugural speech that the torch has been passed to the next generation, and then when he was killed it was passed back to the old generation - LBJ, Nixon, Reagan.....

I met Zach and Steve Rosen at the Wecht Conference, and I think they are the next generation of researchers and I have much faith in them, as well as Will Paris, who is writing an essay or article on the subject of the next generation.

Anyone who is obsessed with one piece of evidence is the one who misguided and easily dismissed.

I admit I am old and gray and will not be doing this very much longer - but I'm doing what I can, and not just sitting back at my computer complaining about everyone else ignoring the holes like CV seems to do.

[Cliff Varnell]

I object to anyone saying that those who were at the conference has their head up their butt.

No, has their head in JFK's head wounds. That didn't apply to you at this conference, right?

Why would it seem silly to grey beards that a ice bullet would be used, when the same notion was expressed more than once?

Because every time the subject is raised the grey-beards bring up Dick Tracy, Get Smart and James Bond.

The kids are not shackled to this 60's-based pop culture bias.

As David Talbot put it, JFK said in his inaugural speech that the torch has been passed to the next generation, and then when he was killed it was passed back to the old generation - LBJ, Nixon, Reagan.....

I met Zach and Steve Rosen at the Wecht Conference, and I think they are the next generation of researchers and I have much faith in them, as well as Will Paris, who is writing an essay or article on the subject of the next generation.

Anyone who is obsessed with one piece of evidence is the one who misguided and easily dismissed.

You haven't mustered up one single argument with which to dismiss me.

Neither you or anyone else in this so-called Community can come here and make a fact-based, collegial argument against anything I post.

I admit I am old and gray and will not be doing this very much longer - but I'm doing what I can, and not just sitting back at my computer complaining about everyone else ignoring the holes like CV seems to do.

It's not only the clothing holes you guys are ignoring, it's the central issue of his killing you guys tap dance around.

Edited October 27, 2013 by Cliff Varnell

[William Kelly]

I object to anyone saying that those who were at the conference has their head up their butt.

No, has their head in JFK's head wounds. That didn't apply to you at this conference, right?

Why would it seem silly to grey beards that a ice bullet would be used, when the same notion was expressed more than once?

Because every time the subject is raised the grey-beards bring up Dick Tracy, Get Smart and James Bond.

The kids are not shackled to this 60's-based pop culture bias.

As David Talbot put it, JFK said in his inaugural speech that the torch has been passed to the next generation, and then when he was killed it was passed back to the old generation - LBJ, Nixon, Reagan.....

I met Zach and Steve Rosen at the Wecht Conference, and I think they are the next generation of researchers and I have much faith in them, as well as Will Paris, who is writing an essay or article on the subject of the next generation.

Anyone who is obsessed with one piece of evidence is the one who misguided and easily dismissed.

You haven't mustered up one single argument with which to dismiss me.

Neither you or anyone else in this so-called Community can come here and make a fact-based, collegial argument against anything I post.

I admit I am old and gray and will not be doing this very much longer - but I'm doing what I can, and not just sitting back at my computer complaining about everyone else ignoring the holes like CV seems to do.

It's not only the clothing holes you guys are ignoring, it's the central issue of his killing you guys tap dance around.

Your questions were raised, by Cyril Wecht in his opening remarks, and it was discussed a number of times throughout the conference.

You should have been there.

I don't disagree with your assertions, I just think that they aren't the only ones, and since I'm not into the medical evidence, I leave that to others.

I just disagree with your continually bringing this up over and over and over again.

What are the possible answers to your questions?

Why can't you pursue your answers on your own, why do you insist that others answer them, and why me, someone who knows nothing about the medical evidence?

[Cliff Varnell]

I object to anyone saying that those who were at the conference has their head up their butt.

No, has their head in JFK's head wounds. That didn't apply to you at this conference, right?

Why would it seem silly to grey beards that a ice bullet would be used, when the same notion was expressed more than once?

Because every time the subject is raised the grey-beards bring up Dick Tracy, Get Smart and James Bond.

The kids are not shackled to this 60's-based pop culture bias.

As David Talbot put it, JFK said in his inaugural speech that the torch has been passed to the next generation, and then when he was killed it was passed back to the old generation - LBJ, Nixon, Reagan.....

I met Zach and Steve Rosen at the Wecht Conference, and I think they are the next generation of researchers and I have much faith in them, as well as Will Paris, who is writing an essay or article on the subject of the next generation.

Anyone who is obsessed with one piece of evidence is the one who misguided and easily dismissed.

You haven't mustered up one single argument with which to dismiss me.

Neither you or anyone else in this so-called Community can come here and make a fact-based, collegial argument against anything I post.

I admit I am old and gray and will not be doing this very much longer - but I'm doing what I can, and not just sitting back at my computer complaining about everyone else ignoring the holes like CV seems to do.

It's not only the clothing holes you guys are ignoring, it's the central issue of his killing you guys tap dance around.

Your questions were raised, by Cyril Wecht in his opening remarks, and it was discussed a number of times throughout the conference.

Wecht brought it up at the Conference -- and then went on TV to say that one bullet created both wounds, a most monstrous Lie.

Shame on Cyril Wecht.

And please tell me about how the subject was raised from the podium, by whom?

You should have been there.

I don't disagree with your assertions, I just think that they aren't the only ones, and since I'm not into the medical evidence, I leave that to others.

You're not interested in the basic facts about how the man died?

I just disagree with your continually bringing this up over and over and over again.

I do it for the kids.

What are the possible answers to your questions?

The historical record indicates two possibilities -- pre-autopsy surgery, or high tech rounds that didn't show up on x-ray.

Why can't you pursue your answers on your own, why do you insist that others answer them, and why me, someone who knows nothing about the medical evidence?

What prevents you from learning about the medical evidence?

Throw out everything related to the head wounds and you're on your way to a fairly quick study, Bill.

[William Kelly]

Well, its quite clear that a lot of people talk about the medical evidence and dont' know what they are talking about.

i will believe Cyril and Pat - though they often don't agree, but I'll listen to them before i will pay attention to you anymore.

While the case you make is simple enough and good example of the types of evidence being ignored, it is not going to break the case.

I have listened to you and have taken the time to respond and all you do is insult me and my friends.

The basic evidence you site I have reviewed, and reviewed again, and then moved on while you keep at it.

Okay, you keep at it, but my purpose at this time and place is to attempt to identify and locate new or previously unknown documents and witnesses and attempt to get them on the record, and I have been pretty successful to date.

You can argue with people on the internet, insult them and me and call people names, and do it in the name of the kids, but I'm going to call you out on it when you are wrong, and you are wrong.

You want to insult those who attended and made presentations at the Wecht conference you should have been there.

Now i'm going to leave the kids to you and others, and move on to other, more important matters.

Edited October 27, 2013 by William Kelly

[Guest Robert Morrow]

I think Cliff Varnell is making a great an obvious point. Just show people the bullet holes in JFK's clothes and tell them NO WAY did a bullet enter there and exit through JFK's throat.

I like the fact Cliff brings up the obvious again and again. It is that important.

And the other obvious zinger is the Zapruder Film showing JFK's head being knocked 'back and to the left" by an OBVIOUS frontal shot.

Vincent Salandria for a long time has said he no longer does microanalysis. Why? It was an obvious coup d'état. Truth has become political will to accept it, not endless belly gazing on the evidence.

I, in fact, still like the microanalysis - it's important. But lead with the obvious truths of the case: bullet holes in clothes, backwards head snap, coup d'état.

[Cliff Varnell]

Well, its quite clear that a lot of people talk about the medical evidence and dont' know what they are talking about.

Care to be specific? What exactly don't I know?

I'd be happy to debate Wecht any day.

Pat Speer knows better than to go down that road.

i will believe Cyril and Pat - though they often don't agree, but I'll listen to them before i will pay attention to you anymore.

When did you pay attention to me in the first place?

While the case you make is simple enough and good example of the types of evidence being ignored, it is not going to break the case.

So I make a simple case providing a good example of the types of evidence being ignored.

But because that case will not, by itself, bring the perps to justice it should be ignored...?

Is that what you're saying?

How many of the perps are still alive to face justice, anyway?

I have listened to you and have taken the time to respond and all you do is insult me and my friends.

I present original research and cogent criticism. You and your friends are not above being criticized, Bill.

The basic evidence you site I have reviewed, and reviewed again, and then moved on while you keep at it.

Excuse me?

You only read Senseney's testimony a few days ago!

You haven't seen my entire argument, since you obviously don't read my posts.

Okay, you keep at it, but my purpose at this time and place is to attempt to identify and locate new or previously unknown documents and witnesses and attempt to get them on the record, and I have been pretty successful to date.

You didn't know George Ball and W. Averell Harriman -- the two guys most responsible for ramming Cable 243 down Kennedy's throat -- were the top two government officials in Washington DC that afternoon.

Did you?

I think that fact is more significant than anything you'll ever dig up, Bill.

You can argue with people on the internet, insult them and me and call people names, and do it in the name of the kids, but I'm going to call you out on it when you are wrong, and you are wrong.

Wrong about what? The Rabbit Hole Digging Machine a/k/a the JFK Assassination Critical Research Community?

When it comes to the medical evidence 95% of the discussion concerns things we cannot know -- how many times was he shot in the head? Was there pre-autopsy surgery to the head?

Since we cannot know the answer to those questions, why the overwhelming obsession with the head wounds?

You want to insult those who attended and made presentations at the Wecht conference you should have been there.

Why? I made a big deal ahead of time that these crucial issues -- which you acknowledge have been ignored -- would not be addressed at Wecht.

I was right.

Charles Barkley once said of basketball beat writers -- "The more they watch the game the less they understand it."

Same is true of a lot of JFK assassination researchers -- the longer they study the case the less they understand it.

[Cliff Varnell]

I think Cliff Varnell is making a great an obvious point.

Thank you, Robert.

Pointing out the obvious is a revolutionary act, as they say.

[William Kelly]

Well, its quite clear that a lot of people talk about the medical evidence and dont' know what they are talking about.

Care to be specific? What exactly don't I know?

I'd be happy to debate Wecht any day.

Pat Speer knows better than to go down that road.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU DON'T KNOW AND DON'T CARE.

YOU CAN DEBATE YOURSELF AS WECHT WON'T GIVE YOU THE TIME OF DAY

PAT KNOWS MORE THAN I DO ABOUT THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE AND KNOWS BETTER THAN TO EVEN ENGAGE IN COVERSATION WITH YOU.

i will believe Cyril and Pat - though they often don't agree, but I'll listen to them before i will pay attention to you anymore.

When did you pay attention to me in the first place?

BY EVEN RESPPONDING TO YOU I AM PAYING ATTENTION, BUT YOU KEEP REPEATING YOURSELF

While the case you make is simple enough and good example of the types of evidence being ignored, it is not going to break the case.

So I make a simple case providing a good example of the types of evidence being ignored.

GAETON FONZI DID THE SAME THING DECADES AGO AND NOW HES DEAD AND GONE AND WE'RE STILL HERE ARGUING ABOUT IT

But because that case will not, by itself, bring the perps to justice it should be ignored...?

Is that what you're saying?

I DIDN'T SAY IT SHOULD BE IGNORED, I JUST SAID THAT THERE IS MORE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE THAT IS MORE CONVINCING

How many of the perps are still alive to face justice, anyway?

MY GOAL ISN'T TO BRING THEM TO JUSTICE - THAT'S THE GOVERNMENT'S JOB - I JUST WANT TO CONFRONT THEM

I have listened to you and have taken the time to respond and all you do is insult me and my friends.

I present original research and cogent criticism. You and your friends are not above being criticized, Bill.

WHAT'S YOUR ORIGINAL RESARCH - HAVEN'T SEEN THAT YET? WHAT HAPPENED TO FORT DETRICK?

AND ME AND MY FRIENDS ARE AWAITING COGENT CRITICISM - NOT SOMEONE SAYING WE HAVE OUR HEADS UP OUR ARSE

The basic evidence you site I have reviewed, and reviewed again, and then moved on while you keep at it.

Excuse me?

You only read Senseney's testimony a few days ago!

AND I'M NOT DONE WITH SENSENEY YET. DID HE ACTUALLLY SAY THEY HAD STORED SHELLFISH TOXINS AT A REMOTE SITE NEAR THE JFK CENTER?

NOW THAT'S REALLY FASCINATING IF TRUE.

You haven't seen my entire argument, since you obviously don't read my posts.

I DO READ YOUR POSTS AND AM RESPONDING TO YOU RIGHT NOW WHEN I HAVE BETTER THIGNS TO DO

Okay, you keep at it, but my purpose at this time and place is to attempt to identify and locate new or previously unknown documents and witnesses and attempt to get them on the record, and I have been pretty successful to date.

You didn't know George Ball and W. Averell Harriman -- the two guys most responsible for ramming Cable 243 down Kennedy's throat -- were the top two government officials in Washington DC that afternoon.

Did you?

I think that fact is more significant than anything you'll ever dig up, Bill.

FROM THE AF1 TAPES WE KNOW THAT LBJ DIDN'T WANT TO MEET WITH BALL WHEN HE GOT BACK TO DC, BUT ENDED UP MEETING HIM ANYWAY.

You can argue with people on the internet, insult them and me and call people names, and do it in the name of the kids, but I'm going to call you out on it when you are wrong, and you are wrong.

Wrong about what? The Rabbit Hole Digging Machine a/k/a the JFK Assassination Critical Research Community?

YOU ARE WRONG THAT THE BEST APPROACH TO THE ASSASSINTION IS TO CALL PEOPLE NAMES AND ARGUE ABOUT IT ON THE INTERNET

When it comes to the medical evidence 95% of the discussion concerns things we cannot know -- how many times was he shot in the head? Was there pre-autopsy surgery to the head?

Since we cannot know the answer to those questions, why the overwhelming obsession with the head wounds?

BECAUASE THAT'S WHAT KILLED HIM AND THE MOTION OF THE JFK'S HEAD IN THE Z-FILM IS THE NUMBER ONE FACT THAT CONVINCES MOST PEOPLE THERE WAS A SHOT FROM THE FRONT AND THUS A CONSPIRACY

You want to insult those who attended and made presentations at the Wecht conference you should have been there.

Why? I made a big deal ahead of time that these crucial issues -- which you acknowledge have been ignored -- would not be addressed at Wecht.

THEY WERE ADDRESSED AT WECHT. I TOLD YOU WECHT HIMSELF ASKED THE SAME QUESTIONS YOU DO.

I was right.

Charles Barkley once said of basketball beat writers -- "The more they watch the game the less they understand it."

AND CHOCHOLATE THUNDER WAS A SELF-OBSESSED IDIOT

Same is true of a lot of JFK assassination researchers -- the longer they study the case the less they understand it.

I LEARN SOMETHING NEW EVERY DAY AND NEVER CLAIMED TO UNDERSTAND IT

AND MOST REAL RESEARCHERS WON'T BOTHER POSTING ON FORUMS BECAUSE OF SELF-OBSESSED POSTERS WHO CONTINUALLY REPEAT THEMSELVES

AND ROBERT, YOU ARE WRONG TOO FOR HARPING ON THE SAME FEW ISSUES OVER AND OVER.

BK

[Cliff Varnell]

Well, its quite clear that a lot of people talk about the medical evidence and dont' know what they are talking about.

Care to be specific? What exactly don't I know?

I'd be happy to debate Wecht any day.

Pat Speer knows better than to go down that road.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU DON'T KNOW AND DON'T CARE.

Then why did you attack along that particular rhetorical line? You say I don't know what I'm talking about -- be specific.

YOU CAN DEBATE YOURSELF AS WECHT WON'T GIVE YOU THE TIME OF DAY

Are you speaking for the man now?

PAT KNOWS MORE THAN I DO ABOUT THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE AND KNOWS BETTER THAN TO EVEN ENGAGE IN COVERSATION WITH YOU.

But he has! 20 or 30 times by his count. And the debates are always short because he doesn't have anything to argue with. He takes the Dave Reitzes - Vince Bugliosi - David Von Pein position in regards to a wound of entry at the back base of the neck, which is physically impossible given the location of the holes in the clothes.

If that is the company you wish to keep, suit yourself, Bill

i will believe Cyril and Pat - though they often don't agree, but I'll listen to them before i will pay attention to you anymore.

When did you pay attention to me in the first place?

BY EVEN RESPPONDING TO YOU I AM PAYING ATTENTION, BUT YOU KEEP REPEATING YOURSELF

As opposed to not saying much of anything at all, like you're doing?

While the case you make is simple enough and good example of the types of evidence being ignored, it is not going to break the case.

So I make a simple case providing a good example of the types of evidence being ignored.

GAETON FONZI DID THE SAME THING DECADES AGO

When did Gaeton inquire as to what rounds created the throat and back wounds?

When did Gaeton help produce an anatomical model which demonstrates the trajectory of the throat wound based on the neck x-ray?

When did Gaeton notice that the top officials in Washington DC were the same guys who engineered US support for the Diem overthrow?

AND NOW HES DEAD AND GONE AND WE'RE STILL HERE ARGUING ABOUT IT

There has never been an argument about it.

There has only been noise.

Witness bashing to the extreme -- when you're on Team Wecht, all the witnesses to JFK's throat/back wounds suffered identical delusions.

That's what I despise most about all this Pet Theorizing -- the implied witness bashing. Disgusting. Truly morally repugnant.

Wecht and Speer are experts who quote other experts, but all the witnesses got it wrong.

And then the endlessly repeated contrary conclusions based on non sequiturs and bald faced lies -- claims about the movement of clothing obviously contrary to the nature of reality.

Look out for what you get in bed with, Bill

But because that case will not, by itself, bring the perps to justice it should be ignored...?

Is that what you're saying?

I DIDN'T SAY IT SHOULD BE IGNORED, I JUST SAID THAT THERE IS MORE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE THAT IS MORE CONVINCING

We can take the Pepsi challenge on that one!

More convincing in what respect?

As proof of conspiracy?

As proof that the murder was carried out and covered up from within the National Security State?

I'll take on you and all your friends in debate about what is the most productive evidence in this case.

How many of the perps are still alive to face justice, anyway?

MY GOAL ISN'T TO BRING THEM TO JUSTICE - THAT'S THE GOVERNMENT'S JOB - I JUST WANT TO CONFRONT THEM

Unless JFK was done in by the Krazy Kid Kommandos the perps are dead, Bill.

I have listened to you and have taken the time to respond and all you do is insult me and my friends.

I present original research and cogent criticism. You and your friends are not above being criticized, Bill.

WHAT'S YOUR ORIGINAL RESARCH - HAVEN'T SEEN THAT YET?

You haven't seen that yet because you're not among the tens upon tens of people who read my posts regularly.

I collaborated with James R. Gordon on an anatomical model which demonstrated the trajectory of the throat wound, based on a HSCA analysis of the neck x-ray.

The HSCA identified an air pocket overlaying the right C7 and T1 transverse processes.

WHAT HAPPENED TO FORT DETRICK?

The FBI Lab headed off the investigation the night of the autopsy.

It was the autopsists who were hot on the trail of Fort Detrick, Bill. They just didn't realize it.

Senseney testified that the CIA returned the testing equipment. Assuming that is true (a big assumption since he displayed more CIA CYA than Colby did in regards to testing on humans) we might look extra hard at US Army Special Forces, tho to be honest the trail is beyond dead cold.

Who knows, maybe someone stole the equipment. What equipment?

For a possible answer to that I turn to a researcher I like a lot, Joe Backes.

In fact, when I grow up to be a real JFK assassination researcher instead of the dedicated hobbyist that I am, I wanna be just like Joe Backes.

This is Backes account of a discussion about Black Dog Man with grassy knoll witness Evelyn King, emphasis mine:

And then she says very fast, quickly, somebody ran right in front of her and then past her and got next to the corner of the concrete wall. Now Robert Groden over the years has said that this is the Black Dog man. Well, Evelyn King related to us basically that she didn’t know who the guy was but he had a Black hoodie on and that his hands were in his front pocket and he appeared to have something in his hands. She said she saw what appeared to be a gun, but she said it was a little bit larger than a handgun. And did the gentleman use it? She said, I don’t know, because she was distracted. She was distracted because as she was sitting there eating lunch a Dallas police officer fired a shot. Well, how do we know it was a Dallas police officer? When the shot was fired she turned around and looked right at the fenceline 15 to 20 feet away, looking at him right in the eye. She said it was a Dallas cop. Before she could hit the ground, another person and she believed was another police officer fired from the fence line.

The HSCA analysis of the Willis #5 photo found "a very distinct straight-line feature" in the area of Black Dog Man's hands.

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol12/html/HSCA_Vol12_0006a.htm

Here's what the HSCA summarized about Rosemary Willis' recollections of the shooting:

Rosemary Willis...noticed two persons who looked "conspicuous." One was a man near

the curb holding an umbrella, who appeared to be more concerned with opening and closing

the umbrella than dropping to the ground like everyone else at the time of the shots. The

other was a person who was standing just behind the concrete wall down by the triple

underpass. That person appeared to "disappear the next instant."

While all this is consistent with Black Dog Man firing the throat shot, it isn't conclusive.

If BDM fired the throat shot, isn't it strange that a weapon a little larger than a handgun would create such minor damage as we see in the neck x-ray?

AND ME AND MY FRIENDS ARE AWAITING COGENT CRITICISM - NOT SOMEONE SAYING WE HAVE OUR HEADS UP OUR ARSE

I say you guys have your heads up JFK's cranial injuries.

How is that the same as saying you guys have your heads up your asses?

The basic evidence you site I have reviewed, and reviewed again, and then moved on while you keep at it.

Excuse me?

You only read Senseney's testimony a few days ago!

AND I'M NOT DONE WITH SENSENEY YET. DID HE ACTUALLLY SAY THEY HAD STORED SHELLFISH TOXINS AT A REMOTE SITE NEAR THE JFK CENTER?

NOW THAT'S REALLY FASCINATING IF TRUE.

I guess I'm not a total Internet Idiot after all. I've always suspected something was missing...

You haven't seen my entire argument, since you obviously don't read my posts.

I DO READ YOUR POSTS AND AM RESPONDING TO YOU RIGHT NOW WHEN I HAVE BETTER THIGNS TO DO

Okay, you keep at it, but my purpose at this time and place is to attempt to identify and locate new or previously unknown documents and witnesses and attempt to get them on the record, and I have been pretty successful to date.

You didn't know George Ball and W. Averell Harriman -- the two guys most responsible for ramming Cable 243 down Kennedy's throat -- were the top two government officials in Washington DC that afternoon.

Did you?

I think that fact is more significant than anything you'll ever dig up, Bill.

FROM THE AF1 TAPES WE KNOW THAT LBJ DIDN'T WANT TO MEET WITH BALL WHEN HE GOT BACK TO DC, BUT ENDED UP MEETING HIM ANYWAY.

Now we're getting somewhere!

Remember, Bill, the guys who promoted the Oswald-as-Commie-Agent cover-up were the losers, and the guys who promoted the Oswald-as-Lone-Nut cover-up were the winners.

99% of research into the cover-up concerns what happened with the losers.

That's another big problem I have you you guys, Bill.

The most productive areas of research haven't been tapped, I don't think

You can argue with people on the internet, insult them and me and call people names, and do it in the name of the kids, but I'm going to call you out on it when you are wrong, and you are wrong.

Wrong about what? The Rabbit Hole Digging Machine a/k/a the JFK Assassination Critical Research Community?

YOU ARE WRONG THAT THE BEST APPROACH TO THE ASSASSINTION IS TO CALL PEOPLE NAMES AND ARGUE ABOUT IT ON THE INTERNET

You are wrong to describe my critique as ad hominem.

I attack the mind-set prevalent in the JFK Assassination Research Community -- an extreme over-emphasis on unknowable, ancillary issues.

When it comes to the medical evidence 95% of the discussion concerns things we cannot know -- how many times was he shot in the head? Was there pre-autopsy surgery to the head?

Since we cannot know the answer to those questions, why the overwhelming obsession with the head wounds?

BECAUASE THAT'S WHAT KILLED HIM

What killed him? One shot? Two? Three? Four? We'll never know and what's more important we don't need to know!

AND THE MOTION OF THE JFK'S HEAD IN THE Z-FILM IS THE NUMBER ONE FACT THAT CONVINCES MOST PEOPLE THERE WAS A SHOT FROM THE FRONT AND THUS A CONSPIRACY

And that's your rationale for spending 95% of the medical discussion on unknowable things?

What a waste of time and energy!

You want to insult those who attended and made presentations at the Wecht conference you should have been there.

Why? I made a big deal ahead of time that these crucial issues -- which you acknowledge have been ignored -- would not be addressed at Wecht.

THEY WERE ADDRESSED AT WECHT. I TOLD YOU WECHT HIMSELF ASKED THE SAME QUESTIONS YOU DO.

Yes, you told me Wecht asked the same question. Bully for Wecht -- except that he didn't answer the question honestly and went on TV and lied his ass off about it, in my book. Flat out lied -- said one bullet created both the throat and back wounds.

Truly disgusting.

Who else beside Wecht addressed this point from the podium? I'm having a hard time getting a straight answer on this one...

I was right.

Charles Barkley once said of basketball beat writers -- "The more they watch the game the less they understand it."

AND CHOCHOLATE THUNDER WAS A SELF-OBSESSED IDIOT

Darryl Dawkins was Chocolate Thunder.

Barkley was the Round Mound of Rebound.

Same is true of a lot of JFK assassination researchers -- the longer they study the case the less they understand it.

I LEARN SOMETHING NEW EVERY DAY AND NEVER CLAIMED TO UNDERSTAND IT

If you are going to sign onto Wecht's and Speer's view of the back and throat wounds -- you are going backwards, sir.

AND MOST REAL RESEARCHERS WON'T BOTHER POSTING ON FORUMS BECAUSE OF SELF-OBSESSED POSTERS WHO CONTINUALLY REPEAT THEMSELVES

Adept with the insults but not with the arguments.

And quite rich for someone who beats the Oswald dead horse ad infinitum ad nauseum...

Hey you guys -- his handlers may have been back-up patsies! Oswald doesn't necessarily lead to the actual perps!

But carry on...I don't want to ruin your fun.

Edited October 28, 2013 by Cliff Varnell

[David Josephs]

Cliff...

before I begin I want you to know I agree with the conclusion that the holes in the shirt and jacket make the SBT impossible. Whether exotic weapons were also used... IDK but given it existed and these boys liked their toys, why not?

My concern with this approach is that it does not address the larger picture.... Gerald Ford fixed it and the WCR lied about it to support a conclusion that HAD to be accepted.... while the physiology is impressive... this overlay tells the entire story. SBT=impossible... we get that and so do MOST of the "newbies"....

Public attention will wane since there is little new or JUICY to keep the attention.... other than the discussion over the shameful way Dallas treated the anniversary.

At 6:45 EST (5:45 Dallas time and just over 5 hours after the shots) the Surgeon General of the Navy with the help/knowledge of Admirals Galloway and Burkley remove evidence from the medical record that points to more than one shooter..

This occurs during PHASE 1 - "the Commie did it possibly with the help/direction of Castro" A Castro/Commie conspiracy to kill JFK SUPPOSEDLY was the desired result of an investigation so the MILITARY could be unleashed.

There is good evidence that this was called off DURING THE FLIGHT BACK and that Oswald was to be the one and only.... at the same time evidence in Dallas is NOT TAKEN to support a GK shooter. No photos of the footprints and "assets" already working the crowd..... How would THEY know at 1:30 in Dallas that evidence of a communist conspiracy WITH OSWALD would also not be acceptable...

Unless there was foreknowledge - which in reality os the entire ball of wax.... FOREKNOWLEDGE removes all doubt...

Also during this flight, arrangements are in the works for personnel (Humes/Boswell/Kenney/Ebersole) at Bethesda to receive JFK's body at 6:45. Humes testifies to such.

Bethesda and the DC district are run by Galloway and Wehle (Lipsey is Wehle's asst)

Kenney is in the room with Hume and Boswell when JFK's body is "unzipped" - they would also be aware of the caskets and the returning of the body to the navy ambulance.

Thanks to O'Connor and a handful of others, we KNOW what happened in that morgue prior to 8pm.

WCR: (NOT possible unless the body is removed from the PARKLAND casket)

Mr. SPECTER - What time did the autopsy start approximately?
Commander HUMES - The president's body was received at 25 minutes before 8, and the autopsy began at approximately 8 p.m. on that evening. You must include the fact that certain X-rays and other examinations were made before the actual beginning of the routine type autopsy examination.

HSCA: (He's still off by an hour or so... and does not address what the MDW was doing)

Mr. CORNWELL. Approximately what time of the day or night did the autopsy begin?
Dr. HUMES. well, the President's body, as I recall, arrived about 7:30 or 7:35 the evening and after some preliminary examinations, about 8 or 8:15. Just very briefly, in what order or sequence did you conduct the autopsy?

ARRB: (And here it is... corroboration of the story of half dozen other men... )

Q. During the autopsy, was the room quiet and hushed or noisy and bustling? How would you describe the scene?
A. It varied. We were there for a long time. We were there from about 6:00 or 6:30 in the evening until 5 o'clock the next morning.

Q. Dr. Humes, when did you first see the body of President Kennedy?
A. I didn't look at my watch, if I even had a watch on, but I would guess it was 6:45 or 7 o'clock, something like that, approximately.

As we both know the Casket does not even arrive out front until 6:55... is offloaded by the SS/FBI at 7:17... is REloaded and offloaded again by 8pm.

And yet this information floats out there without serious concern or comment to its impossbility.... or the implications it has to the testimony of these morgue "workers" ...

Like the bullet holes, THESE cannot be moved or changed or made to disappear by the CIA/FBI/SS or anyone else.

And yet we are discussing evidence that has no authentication, no chain of custody, nothing that would lead ANYONE to conclude it was a representation of JFK at Parkland...

Just the kind of dead horse stuff you mention in others.... the medical evidence is as far from "evidence" as it gets...

So what is the "big juicy" that may keep the interest of the common person? That the FBI lied and fabricated/altered/destroyed evidence?

Too much there to use - overwhelms the unitiated...

How about Hoover sending an Agent to Ft Worth TX on Saturday morning the 23rd to get the asst principal out of bed to TAKE the original school records of Lee Harvey Oswald from 1954

and yet another agent to NOLA to question the employees, managers and owners of Pfisterer Dental about 1956, 1957 and 1958.

What pray tell did HOOVER KNOW that prompted him to gather up materials from Oswald's past, specifically these two places and times, in the first hours after charging Oswald with JFK's murder?

Oswald was an FBI informant ... If HOOVER needed to protect that info from coming out...

what do Stripling Junior High School 1954 and Pfisterer Dental 1958 have in common? What was so important in Oswald's past that HOOVER needed to keep info from 1954 hidden?

[Cliff Varnell]

George Ball and W. Averell Harriman -- the two guys most responsible for ramming Cable 243 down Kennedy's throat -- were the top two government officials in Washington DC that afternoon.

FROM THE AF1 TAPES WE KNOW THAT LBJ DIDN'T WANT TO MEET WITH BALL WHEN HE GOT BACK TO DC, BUT ENDED UP MEETING HIM ANYWAY.

Now we're getting somewhere!

Remember, Bill, the guys who promoted the Oswald-as-Commie-Agent cover-up were the losers, and the guys who promoted the Oswald-as-Lone-Nut cover-up were the winners.

99% of research into the cover-up concerns what happened with the losers.

That's no exaggeration, that 99% number.

Allow me to illustrate:

The Official Oswald Frame-up Winners:

W. Averell Harriman

McGeorge Bundy

George Ball

The Un-Official Oswald Frame-up Losers:

J. Edgar Hoover

J.J. Angleton

David A. Phillips

Seems to me all the research oxygen on the cover-up has been sucked up by the losers.

Same with the core issue of the murder, in my book, fwiw etc.

JFK had a wound of entrance in the back, no exit no round recovered; same with the throat.

The historical record indicates two possibilities:

1) Rounds that didn't show up on x-ray

2) Pre-autopsy surgery to remove rounds.

99% of the research on these possibilities involve the names Louis Witt and David Lifton.

Lifton I can understand, Witt not so much...

Edited October 29, 2013 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

The historical record indicates two possibilities:

1) Rounds that didn't show up on x-ray

...

Here's the problem, folks: there is a pop cultural bias against 1) amongst Boomer-age researchers.

When Boomers think of high-tech weaponry, they think of James Bond, Get Smart and Dick Tracy.

The Millennial Generation -- raised on high-tech -- carry no such cultural bias.

What appears silly to Boomers may appear obvious to the kids.

Ya olde bastids -- get over it!