Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

Valuable 2   Must Read 1   Interesting 1   View Ratings | Rate It

Permalink
View Article Stats      (42 comments)

The Great Enemy of the Truth

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend

Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (23 fans)   -- Page 4 of 6 page(s)

opednews.com

But then, the Warren Commission's investigators were dependent on the wildest and most self-serving suppositions possible, suppositions that could not be supported by the evidence: that the wound to the upper back and the wound to the throat were made by the same bullet. The best evidence, because of the failure to properly dissect the wound track, is the testimony of the physicians and nurses at Parkland's Emergency Room, said that they both appeared to be entry wounds. If they were both entry wounds, then we have at least two assassins/teams in Dealey Plaza on that November afternoon.

Even if police and Federal authorities could only find physical evidence for three bullets being fired, it is not proof (or even evidence) that one of those wounds in JFK was an entrance and the other an exit wound; it is at the very most, the evidence of two wounds. This is plainly a case of manipulating the facts to fit your theories.

I'm not an attorney, but I believe that I could object to an attempt to introduce such evidence on the basis of it being incompetent and immaterial, in that it goes to matters outside of the witnesses' direct knowledge.

Yes, I did watch a lot of episodes of Perry Mason when I was younger.

No, in this case, "best evidence" would be the testimony of the doctors and nurses at Parkland Memorial Trauma Room 1; the majority of whom stated that the wound to JFK's throat appeared to be an entrance wound. This wound was then used as the basis for a tracheotomy. It is the tracheotomy that is the cause of the throat wound's larger apparent size, not because it is an exit wound.

This also leads to another conclusion, that there was no single bullet which traversed through JFK's upper back and then out of the notch of his throat, let alone one that continued on to do such massive damage to Governor Connally. The most probable explanation is that the two wounds were made by different gunmen: the back wound from someone firing behind the President; the throat wound from someone firing in front of the President.

This means that there were at least four shots that grim November afternoon. Law enforcement's inability to account for those additional bullets would not mean they do not exist; only that law enforcement cannot account for them.

So, why were no other bullets found?

Actually, parts of several bullets were found. There were large bullet fragments on the floor of the limousine, a bullet found 300 feet down range from the TSBD; evidence for potentially as many as ten different bullets. I believe that some of these indicators, such as the dented chrome above the Presidential limousine's windshield, and the hole in the windshield itself were from bullet fragments.

I believe that only five or six of the indicators were actually caused by independent bullets, the rest were caused by bullet fragments.

I also believe that one or more of the other assassins were probably using some form of frangible or explosivebullet, like the mercury tipped ones described in Frederick Forsyth's book The Day of the Jackal. Or some devilish design out of the CIA's Science and Technology Directorate. With their "explosive" capability, and the fact that they shatter into a thousand unidentifiable pieces on impact, they are the perfect weapon for a sure kill that cannot be traced.

If there were at least four shots, then there had to be (by the Warren Commission's own logic) at least two gunmen. If there are two gunmen, that makes it a conspiracy, something that the National Security State did not (and I suspect even today does not) want properly investigated.

So let us quickly recap:

  1. The loss of material in CE 399, the so-called "magic bullet," almost certainly cannot account for all of the bullet fragments in Governor Connally's body, since two of those fragments alone account for more than half the lost material.

  2. There is no evidence that CE 399--or any other bullet--ever traversed the interior of President Kennedy's upper torso from the back to the notch of the throat. This is because of the failure of the doctors (at the behest of their superiors) performing the autopsy to fully probe or dissect the wounds in the back and the throat to see if there was a wound track consistent with the theory. In fact the best evidence we have is that they are two completely separate entry wounds.

  3. If no bullet passed through President Kennedy, it could not have continued tumbling onward to hit Governor Connally. This means an entirely different bullet hit Governor Connally from the rear. The short period of time between the round that hit Kennedy, and the one that hit Connally, makes it impossible for the shot that hit Connally to have come from the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. This means that there were at least two assassins with rifles behind the President's limousine. This--together with the throat wound--also proves that there had to be at least three assassins/teams in the kill zone at Dealey Plaza that day.

    Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6

 

Richard Girard is an increasingly radical representative of the disabled and disenfranchised members of America's downtrodden, who suffers from bipolar disorder (type II or type III, the professionals do not agree). He has put together a team to (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
42 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Fascinating! Thanks again, Richard by Margaret Bassett on Wednesday, Mar 3, 2010 at 9:44:37 PM
Great summary by Truth Excavator on Wednesday, Mar 3, 2010 at 10:07:46 PM
The driver did it. by daveys on Thursday, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:42:36 PM
The driver did it. by daveys on Thursday, Mar 4, 2010 at 2:18:57 PM
It is always... by Richard Girard on Thursday, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:58:34 PM
Last true President? by Darrin Kellogg on Monday, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:02:54 AM
You are welcome Margaret! by Richard Girard on Thursday, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:49:18 PM
Another JFK by Your Friend Fairpay on Thursday, Mar 4, 2010 at 6:45:52 PM
Entertaining article but harly enlightening by Paul May on Thursday, Mar 4, 2010 at 9:36:02 PM
I look at Mr. May 's comment and think of by Margaret Bassett on Friday, Mar 5, 2010 at 1:23:49 AM
Bit confused by Paul May on Friday, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:33:04 AM
More on JFK by David Wrightsman on Friday, Mar 5, 2010 at 9:25:53 AM
Response to Mr. Wrightsman by Paul May on Friday, Mar 5, 2010 at 11:02:44 AM
Change of motorcade route by Darrin Kellogg on Friday, Mar 5, 2010 at 10:44:35 PM
Mr. Kellogg by Paul May on Saturday, Mar 6, 2010 at 8:07:48 AM
Mr. May--if that is your name, which I doubt; by Richard Girard on Saturday, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:29:50 PM
Let's be serious by Paul May on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 at 9:24:51 PM
As promised my answer. by Richard Girard on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 at 4:01:52 PM
The obviousness of more than one shooter by Darrin Kellogg on Sunday, Mar 7, 2010 at 11:51:38 PM
Wrong again! by Paul May on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 at 9:36:07 PM
There is absolutely no physical evidence..." by daveys on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 at 9:48:56 PM
And I still made it under my self-imposed time limit by Richard Girard on Saturday, Mar 13, 2010 at 5:10:01 PM
You're kidding by Paul May on Sunday, Mar 14, 2010 at 11:19:01 AM
No sir, quit putting words in my mouth... by Richard Girard on Monday, Mar 15, 2010 at 5:48:46 PM
Mr. Girard, do you lie without thinking? by Paul May on Monday, Mar 15, 2010 at 6:34:13 PM
Except it is not Just Prouty you Propagandist by Richard Girard on Tuesday, Mar 16, 2010 at 4:26:23 PM
One can only laugh at the continued ignorance of Mr. Girard by Paul May on Tuesday, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:29:18 PM
More on Prouty by Paul May on Tuesday, Mar 16, 2010 at 5:38:13 PM
Was he lying under oath? by Darrin Kellogg on Tuesday, Mar 16, 2010 at 11:09:09 PM
My retort: One by one by Darrin Kellogg on Tuesday, Mar 16, 2010 at 10:49:02 PM
Response to Mr. Kellogg... by Paul May on Tuesday, Mar 16, 2010 at 11:03:54 PM
It is open to debate by Darrin Kellogg on Wednesday, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:28:32 AM
What is so seemingly distasteful...... by Natalie Oberman on Sunday, Mar 7, 2010 at 1:17:15 AM
Because the preponderance of evidence... by Richard Girard on Monday, Mar 8, 2010 at 3:20:34 PM
Be careful by Darrin Kellogg on Wednesday, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:48:32 AM
Your prescripton doesn't mean cure by Darrin Kellogg on Wednesday, Mar 17, 2010 at 12:37:48 AM
Good article by Nick van Nes on Sunday, Mar 7, 2010 at 7:15:33 PM
Here come the truthers by Natalie Oberman on Monday, Mar 8, 2010 at 12:47:32 AM
Dear Ms. Oberman by Richard Girard on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 at 3:52:13 PM
Who is this Oberman woman? by daveys on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 at 4:44:30 PM
Who is this daveys guy? by Paul May on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 at 9:49:32 PM
WHATEVER. by daveys on Wednesday, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:02:06 PM