Deletion of valid JFKA thread by mods

[Cliff Varnell]

2 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

No further discussion needed with this uber-silly comment. 

You have no rebuttal.

A fact stupid people cannot process: blood soluble paralytics and toxins were developed at Ft. Detrick, MD, for CIA project MKNAOMI.

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

Edited July 29 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Kevin Balch said:

This source states that a neuromuscular paralyzer commonly used before emergency intubation takes about 45 seconds to act when administered intravenously into a vein. Such an agent introduced via a bullet (or Umbrella Man’s flechette) would not necessarily be introduced in the optimal location and would take even longer to work. Do you know of an agent works nearly instantaneously?

https://iem-student.org/paralysing-agents/

The paralytic developed for CIA project MKNAOMI instantly paralyzed guard dogs to keep them from barking.

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

page 162

[Cliff Varnell]

Only genuine lead in the entire case but the JFKA Critical Community is too collectively stupid to pursue it.

[Ron Bulman]

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

The paralytic developed for CIA project MKNAOMI instantly paralyzed guard dogs to keep them from barking.

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

page 162

Never read this full testimony by Senseney before, never heard of him.  Obviously working indirectly for Gottlieb.  I'd read of the dog silencer, I thought much earlier in history.  A really interesting full read.

Senator SCHWEIKER. The only thing that I know that was really used was the dog projectile. The other things were in the stockpiles. I don’t think anyone ever requested them. Senator SCHWEIKER. How do you know for certain it was for dogs? Mr. SENSENEY. Well, that is what they asked us to test them against. They wanted to see whether they could put a dog to sleep, and whether sometime later the dog would come back and be on its own and look normal. Senator SCHWEIKER. Of course, as I recall, that is what they did with Gary Powers’ drill with shellfish toxin. They tested it on a do to see if it would work. So I do not know that that at all woul Fi conclude that it was only provided for dogs. Of the devices that came through you, which of these were utilized in any capacity other than for testing! Mr. SENSENEY. That was the only one that I know of-the dog projectile. I call it a dog projectile. We were developing it because the scenario read that they wanted to be able to make entrance into an area which was patrolled by dogs, leave, the dog come back, and then no one would ever know they were in the area. So that was the reason for the dog projectile. Senator SCHWEIKER. And how many of these were made? Mr. SENSENEY. Well I would say there were probably as many as 50 at least. They tookSenator SCHWEIKER. About 502 Mr. SENSENEY. Yes. Senator SCHWEIKER. And didn’t you get any reports back from the field on their effectiveness ? Mr. SENSENEY. No. That is one thing you never get; you never get the feedsback. You did not know what happened. Senator SCHWEIEER. I’m puzzled by that. You are the research and development person ; you design the weapon-and I haven% seen a part of the military yet that did not have some feedback on whether it was effective in hitting the target or missing it. How do you know if you are doing things right ‘or wrong! Mr. SENSENEY. We must have been doing right. They kept asking for it. Senator SCHWEIKER. Then somebody was using them, I gather. Is that correct Z Mr. SENSENEY. I would assume so. The missile was gone when they returned the hardware, sir. Senator SCIIWEIKER. But you cannot give us any specific e

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Only genuine lead in the entire case but the JFKA Critical Community is too collectively stupid to pursue it.

Yeah, all of those Oswald bullet shells and bullets and guns and prints plus LHO's guilty-like actions weren't "genuine leads" in the JFKA case at all, were they Clifford? We should, instead, be focusing all of our attention on some sort of "heart attack dart gun".

(And yet Cliff, incredibly, has the gall to call a bunch of other people "stupid". Pathetic....as per usual.)

 

Edited July 29 by David Von Pein

[Ron Bulman]

On 7/18/2024 at 1:09 PM, Andrew Iler said:

The JFKA community and this forum have unique insight to how badly things can be done from a historical perspective. 

Thank you, Andrew.

[Ron Bulman]

This thread might well have been transferred to the Questions, Comments and Criticisms on EF moderation several days ago.  Andrew makes a good point.  Maybe there is some value to it after all.

For the moment let's all rejoice, it's Christmas in July, at least on Hallmark.

 

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

Yeah, all of those Oswald bullet shells and bullets and guns and prints plus LHO's guilty-like actions weren't "genuine leads" in the JFKA case at all, were they Clifford?

JFK suffered a shallow back wound in soft tissue.  6.5mm FMJ don't leave shallow wounds in soft tissue.

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

 

We should, instead, be focusing all of our attention on some sort of "heart attack dart gun".

It's called pursuing a lead.

1 hour ago, David Von Pein said:

(And yet Cliff, incredibly, has the gall to call a bunch of other people "stupid". Pathetic....as per usual.)

 

Steve Roe called himself "stupid."  I was just agreeing with him. 

As for the people who I called "collectively stupid" -- they are the same people David Von Pein has been calling "silly" for decades.

Edited July 29 by Cliff Varnell

[David Von Pein]

11 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

JFK suffered a shallow back wound in soft tissue. 

Untrue.

"There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds as indicated by subcutaneous emphysema and small metallic fragments on the X-rays and the contusion of the apex of the right lung and laceration of the trachea described in the Autopsy Report. In addition, any path other than one between the two cutaneous wounds would almost surely have been intercepted by bone and the X-ray films show no bony damage in the thorax or neck." -- Clark Panel; 1968

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html

 

[Cliff Varnell]

The Autopsy Report was not prepared according to proper autopsy protocol, thus carries no evidentiary weight.

There is no such doubt surrounding the clothing evidence.  David Von Pein has observed the fact that JFK's jacket collar dropped in Dealey Plaza, and the jacket was elevated only "a little bit."

The Single Bullet Theory thus stands debunked.

Edited July 29 by Cliff Varnell

[Steve Roe]

On 7/29/2024 at 1:38 AM, David Von Pein said:

Untrue.

"There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds as indicated by subcutaneous emphysema and small metallic fragments on the X-rays and the contusion of the apex of the right lung and laceration of the trachea described in the Autopsy Report. In addition, any path other than one between the two cutaneous wounds would almost surely have been intercepted by bone and the X-ray films show no bony damage in the thorax or neck." -- Clark Panel; 1968

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html

 

 

[Steve Roe]

Just now, Steve Roe said:

 

David, this will be ignored of course. Even the late Dr. Cyril Wecht testified that the bullet was a transiting bullet from the back and out the throat. Mr. Vanell has isolated himself into a loon theory that he now has ownership over, barring any concrete information to prove other than his own flawed speculation. 

Now Mr. Vanell has to explain to everyone here who took a clearly rifle shot at the Governor sans a "gulp" bioweapon bullet. And of course, Mr. Vanell has to explain to everyone whether the spent three shells on the 6th floor, clearly from Oswald's rifle was a "gulp" staged prop.

Mr. Vanell, who enjoys calling me stupid, has locked himself into one of the wackiest Rube Godberg theories out there So crazy, even DiEugenio won't endorse it, and that's bad. 

It's drop dead crazy. 

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, Steve Roe said:

Mr. Vanell [sic], who enjoys calling me stupid, has locked himself into one of the wackiest Rube Godberg [sic] theories out there. So crazy, even DiEugenio won't endorse it, and that's bad. It's drop dead crazy. 

Yeah, Cliff's theory about the paralyzing dart (or bullet) is pretty far out in left field indeed, but in Mr. Varnell's world, solving the JFK murder case always seems to boil down to talking about President Kennedy's clothing. Nothing else seems to matter too much in Varnell's shirt-and-jacket-dominated universe.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-789.html

Excerpt from the above link:

"The jacket collar could be "hiked up" a little bit and still have some of JFK's white shirt visible. Why you [Cliff Varnell] think such a thing is a complete impossibility only shows how desperate you are to trash the totally reasonable (and feasible) Single-Bullet Conclusion.

Plus: Why is it not possible in your world to have the collar portion of a person's jacket hiked up just SLIGHTLY and (at the same time) also have a different (lower) portion of that same person's jacket hiked up (or "bunched up") more than just SLIGHTLY?

In the world of Cliff "Everything In The Whole JFK Case Revolves Around Kennedy's Clothing" Varnell, the above scenario of having President Kennedy's COLLAR only raised (or "hiked") a little bit but a lower portion of his suit coat hiked up a bit MORE than "just slightly" is something that couldn't happen in a million years -- even though several photos taken of JFK in the Dallas motorcade PROVE beyond all doubt that that very thing I just described regarding JFK's jacket WAS occurring when Mr. Kennedy was riding in his limousine through the streets of Dallas, Texas, on Nov. 22, 1963."

-- DVP; August 30, 2014 [Via This EF Forum Discussion]

 

Edited Thursday at 01:14 AM by David Von Pein

[Cliff Varnell]

2 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

David, this will be ignored of course. Even the late Dr. Cyril Wecht testified that the bullet was a transiting bullet from the back and out the throat.

Factually incorrect.  Dr. Wecht ridiculed the idea.

2 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

Mr. Vanell has isolated himself into a loon theory that he now has ownership over, barring any concrete information to prove other than his own flawed speculation. 

The physical and historical facts put the lie to these claims.

The bullet holes in the clothes are too low to associate with the throat wound.

The autopsists' speculated JFK was hit with a high tech round that dissolved.

2 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

Now Mr. Vanell has to explain to everyone here who took a clearly rifle shot at the Governor sans a "gulp" bioweapon bullet. And of course, Mr. Vanell has to explain to everyone whether the spent three shells on the 6th floor, clearly from Oswald's rifle was a "gulp" staged prop.

The use of high tech weapons doesn't preclude the use of conventional weapons.

2 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

Mr. Vanell, who enjoys calling me stupid,

You referred to yourself as "stupid."  You give me every reason to agree.

2 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

 

has locked himself into one of the wackiest Rube Godberg theories out there So crazy, even DiEugenio won't endorse it, and that's bad.

I'm a long-time critic of Jim DiEugenio.

That JFK was hit with a high tech round originated with the autopsists, not me.

Edited Thursday at 02:00 AM by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

8 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Yeah, Cliff's theory about the paralyzing dart (or bullet) is pretty far out in left field indeed,

Not my theory.  That is what the autopsists' speculated with the body in front of them.

8 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

 

but in Mr. Varnell's world, solving the JFK murder case always seems to boil down to talking about President Kennedy's clothing. Nothing else seems to matter too much in Varnell's shirt-and-jacket-dominated universe.

Physical evidence has more evidentiary weight than any other kind of evidence.

https://www.casdschools.org/site/handlers/filedownload.ashx?moduleinstanceid=7201&dataid=6177&FileName=02-TypesOfEvidence.pdf

"Physical evidence is generally much more reliable than testimonial evidence."

 

8 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-789.html

Excerpt from the above link:

"The jacket collar could be "hiked up" a little bit and still have some of JFK's white shirt visible. Why you [Cliff Varnell] think such a thing is a complete impossibility only shows how desperate you are to trash the totally reasonable (and feasible) Single-Bullet Conclusion.

 

But the jacket collar wasn't hiked up at all.  You're claiming that multiple inches of shirt and an equal amount of jacket was elevated entirely above the SBT in-shoot at the base of the neck (or slightly below) without pushing up on the jacket collar, the lower margin of which normally rests at the base of the neck (or slightly above.)

Disparate physical objects cannot occupy the same physical space at the same time.  That's why we have car wrecks.

David Von Pein agrees that JFK's jacket collar dropped in Dealey Plaza, and the jacket was elevated "a little bit."

The SBT thus stands debunked.

Edited Thursday at 08:37 AM by Cliff Varnell