The Clean Cut Throat Wound

[Cliff Varnell]

This is instructive:

Vincent Bugliosi, Reclaiming History, pg 170-1:

<quote on, emphasis added>

In a small alcove of the autopsy room at Behsda Naval Hospital, the acting chief of radiology, Dr. John Ebersole, clips the last of the x-rays onto a light box. Nothing. No bullet. The president's entire body has been x-rayed and still the doctors have been unabel to determine what happened to the bullet that struck his back.

"Where did it go? someone asked.

The doctors have no idea. A discussion ensues about what might have happened to it. Someone suggests the possibility that a soft-nosed bullet struck the president and disintegrated. Others contemplate that the bullet could have been "plastic", and therefore not easily seen by x-rays, or that it was an "Ice" bullet, which dissolved after contact.  None of the suggestions made much sense, but then neither did the absence of a bullet. FBI agent Jim Sibert decided to call the FBI laboratory and find out if anyone there knew of a bullet that would almost completely fragmentize. He managed to reach Charles L. Killion of the firearms section of the lab, who said he never heard of such a thing. After Sibert explained the problem. Killion asked if he was aware that a bullet had been found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital.  Sibert hadn't and is nearly certain that no one else at the morgue has either. Sibert hangs up the phone, returns to the autopsy room, and informs the three pathologists that a bullet had been recovered at Parkland Hospital.

<quote off>

But Killion HAD heard of this technology.  The FBI had been briefed on it “to acquaint them with possible ways that other people could attack our own people.”

Our own President?

 

Edited June 4, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Michael Griffith]

6 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

 

Are you aware that after the Y incision was made, they were able to find and track the wound through Kennedy?

 

Huh??? This is your answer to the accounts of the probing??? Or did you write this without reading the accounts? Are you aware that we've known for years that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about a bullet exiting the throat? Doug Horne has documented this in great detail (Inside the Assassination Records Review Board, Volume 3, 2010 printing, pp. 845-871).

By the way, Secret Service agent Bill Greer, who was present for the entire autopsy, is yet another witness who heard nothing about the back wound having an exit point during the autopsy:

          Specter: Was anything said about any channel being present in the body for the bullet to have gone on through the back?
          Greer: No, sir; I hadn't heard anything like that, any trace of it going on
through. (2 H 127) 

I've quoted Sibert and O'Neill's ARRB testimony and O'Neill's HSCA interview, but let's see what they said just four days after the autopsy in their report on the autopsy:

          During the latter stages of this autopsy, Dr. Humes located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders. . . . This opening was probed by Dr. Humes with the finger, at which time it was
determined that the trajectory of the missile entering at this point had entered at a downward position of 45 to 60 degrees. Further probing determined that the distance traveled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger. (Francis O'Neill and James Sibert, "Autopsy of Body of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy," 11/26/1963, p. 4, LINK)

Well, no wonder the WC ignored this report, did not include it in the published hearings and exhibits, and buried it in the National Archives, where Harold Weisberg discovered it in 1966. 

But let's get even closer to the time of the autopsy. Sibert and O'Neill sent a telegram to FBI Director Hoover at 2:00 AM on 11/23/1963, just hours after the autopsy, and therein they said the back wound was located below the shoulder and was a shallow wound that had no exit point:

          One bullet hole located just below shoulders to right of spinal column, and hand probing indicated trajectory at angle of 45 to 60 degrees downward and hole of short depth with no point of exit. (O'Neill and Sibert, FBI teletype: Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, 11/23/1963, p. 1, ARRB document MD 149)

 

Edited June 4, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Benjamin Cole]

3 hours ago, Michael Crane said:

Once again,

Humes tried to tell us that something was drastically wrong and some f***ery was going on when he blurted out that there was "surgery of the head area"

Not only that..but his description of the laceration on JFK's head in the autopsy report.This laceration was so deep (and long) that when described by an actual Dr,it was like his head was hit with an ax.

OK, then, in your estimation could someone have probed JFK and removed a missile, pre-autopsy? 

[Michael Griffith]

51 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

OK, then, in your estimation could someone have probed JFK and removed a missile, pre-autopsy? 

Doug Horne deals with this issue in some depth. He makes a credible case that, yes, there was pre-autopsy surgery (sometimes aka post-mortem surgery), and that Humes and Boswell were the ones who did the illicit surgery. He covers this in his Inside the ARRB book. He discusses it in this video:

The JFK Medical Coverup Q & A – The Future of Freedom Foundation (fff.org)

[Michael Crane]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

OK, then, in your estimation could someone have probed JFK and removed a missile, pre-autopsy? 

I believe so.

By any chance,have you seen David Lifton's "Best Evidence" research video?

Sometimes when you are dealing with information coming from the 3 agencies,you have to believe the exact opposite.It's my understanding that a craniotomy was scheduled for Walter Reed? but this event never materialized.I'm under the impression that it might just have happened.

Edited June 4, 2023 by Michael Crane

[Michael Crane]

14 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

Doug Horne deals with this issue in some depth. He makes a credible case that, yes, there was pre-autopsy surgery (sometimes aka post-mortem surgery), and that Humes and Boswell were the ones who did the illicit surgery. He covers this in his Inside the ARRB book. He discusses it in this video:

The JFK Medical Coverup Q & A – The Future of Freedom Foundation (fff.org)

Hello Mike,

I to believed Doug Horn when his 5 volumes set first came out ( I own it )

But then I watched about 3 outstanding videos interviewing with James Jenkins.

What really bothers me is,I can find 2 of them,but I can't find the most informative & longest 3rd video.

[Michael Crane]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

OK, then, in your estimation could someone have probed JFK and removed a missile, pre-autopsy? 

Jenkins explains that Custer had to take x-rays two times & they still could not locate a bullet,so they brought in Ebersole to do a 3rd time without success.

Edited June 4, 2023 by Michael Crane

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Michael Crane said:

Jenkins explains that Custer had to take x-rays two times & they still could not locate a bullet,so they brought in Ebersole to do a 3rd time without success.

Jenkins told Valuetainment Youtuber that he personally witnessed the President's body arriving in a plain metal shipping casket, about one hour before the official arrival or the fancy casket.

This is endlessly mysterious. If true, that suggests the President body was never in the fancy casket, but was switched out in somewhere in Dallas before the fancy casket was placed on Air Force 1.

Maybe the plain metal casket flew on Air Force 2. 

[Bill Brown]

6 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

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>

 

I'm talking about real bullets, copper, steel, lead.  You keep talking about ice bullets.

 

[Bill Brown]

6 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Pure what?

From autopsy-attendee FBI SA Francis O'Neill's sworn affidavit for the HSCA:

<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.

<quote off>

From autopsy-attendee FBI SA James Sibert's sworn affidavit for the HSCA:

<quote on>

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 (sic).

<quote off>

 

 

No Sir.

 

You clearly stated: "The autopsists THOUGHT JFK was hit with a high tech weapon, rounds that wouldn’t show up on x-Ray or in the body."

 

That is a far cry from the reality that they were simply considering all possibilities at that moment.

 

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

 

No Sir.

 

You clearly stated: "The autopsists THOUGHT JFK was hit with a high tech weapon, rounds that wouldn’t show up on x-Ray or in the body."

 

That is a far cry from the reality that they were simply considering all possibilities at that moment.

 

That is a far cry from a cogent understanding of the historical record.

The night of the autopsy Humes et al seriously considered the possibility JFK was hit with a high tech weapon.

Deal with it.

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

 

I'm talking about real bullets, copper, steel, lead.  You keep talking about ice bullets.

 

Those bullets never leave a shallow wound in soft tissue, and JFK suffered a shallow wound in soft tissue.

Two counting the wound in the throat.

Why is this so hard for you to grasp?

Edited June 4, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Bill Brown]

20 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

That is a far cry from a cogent understanding of the historical record.

The night of the autopsy Humes et al seriously considered the possibility JFK was hit with a high tech weapon.

Deal with it.

 

"The night of the autopsy Humes et al seriously considered the possibility JFK was hit with a high tech weapon."

 

What are you failing to understand here?  You stated that Humes et al THOUGHT Kennedy was hit with a high tech weapon firing missiles which would not show up in an X-ray.

 

I am telling you that they considered all possibilities, yes.  But that is not to say that they actually thought it was true or that they ever believed it.

 

You twist reality in order to get it to fit your foolishness.  Just stop.

 

[Bill Brown]

23 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Those bullets never leave a shallow wound in soft tissue, and JFK suffered a shallow wound in soft tissue.

Two counting the wound in the throat.

Why is this so hard for you to grasp?

 

Except that you are wrong when you say that Kennedy suffered a shallow wound in soft tissue.  The wound was completely tracked from back to front.  You'd know this if you would read the autopsy report.

 

I always find it comical when one criticizes something which they have obviously never read.  Well, comical and pathetic at the same time.

 

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

 

"The night of the autopsy Humes et al seriously considered the possibility JFK was hit with a high tech weapon."

 

What are you failing to understand here?  You stated that Humes et al THOUGHT Kennedy was hit with a high tech weapon firing missiles which would not show up in an X-ray.

And you disputed that fact and you’ve been proven wrong.

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

 

I am telling you that they considered all possibilities, yes.  But that is not to say that they actually thought it was true or that they ever believed it.

A distinction without a difference.

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

 

You twist reality in order to get it to fit your foolishness.  Just stop.

 

You can’t process information?