Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

The "story" of the Zapruder film is that JFK was cruising down Elm Street, smiling and waving, and then he got behind the freeway sign, and that's where everything happened; everything, that is, except the fatal head shot. That freeway sign is like the magician's curtain. 

So, he's fine and dandy before the sign, but he is stricken like hell after the sign, and that's the story. 

But, the first problem is that he gets to that sign too fast. You can see the sign at the top of Dealey Plaza in the Zapruder film. That's it in the right lower corner. 

The sign is no longer there, but say that a proxy was put in the location that sign was, and someone stood on Zapruder's pedestal and pointed at the top of Dealey Plaza, there is no way the proxy sign would be captured. Zapruder couldn't capture half the length of Dealey Plaza in one camera view, especially since he was zooming in. That is the top of Dealey Plaza, and the sign was not at the top of Dealey Plaza. And, as I have pointed out, the orientation of the sign is wrong. The sign was perpendicular to the road, and that sign is not perpendicular. It would have to be rotated quite a lot counter-clockwise to have the right orientation. 

It's a bogus sign in the wrong place, so what's going on? What's going on is that a large chunk of the Zapruder film was excised. 

So, the part in red was cut out of the Z-film, and that's why the limo reaches the freeway sign (circled in white) so fast in the Z-film. Why did they cut it out? They cut it out because JFK received the shot in the back a little past the "O" in the image. That O stands for Obelisk. 

Remember, that the "story" of the Z-film was built to support the Single Bullet Theory, which is that the back shot and the neck shot were one continuous shot. But, when you throw out the Single Bullet Theory, you shouldn't feel obliged to retain the simultaniety of the back and neck shots. They didn't have to happen at the same time or even close together. 

I maintain that the red swath was cut out of the Zapruder film because it was there that JFK was reacting to the back shot alone. And then, when he reached the sign, he was shot in the throat. Since "they" were combining the two shots, they had to move the back shot down to the sign as well. And therefore, he could not be seen reacting to being shot before the sign. But, if you look closely, you can tell that he is shot in the back in the Croft photo.

He is not waving. He exhibits posterior cervical tension and shortening. There is a photographic screen placed over his back in the area he was shot. 

It's like a collar standing up there. Jackie's hair has been enhanced to cover his mouth, and his eye appears to be shut, which is very unlikely. 

A lot was done to this photo to hide the fact that he was shot here. 

There are two other images of JFK before he reaches the freeway sign, and in both, he is not waving. The first is Betzner. 

We would see JFK's arm up if he was waving it. And notice the difference in the behavior of the spectators. On our right, which is higher on the hill, they are waving enthusiastically, but no one is waving among the people standing next to the freeway sign. He's not waving, and they're not waving.

Then there is Willis, which comes right before the sign. JFK isn't waving, and neither are the spectators, including Umbrella Man. 

So, there was a rather long stretch in which JFK stopped waving before he got to the freeway sign, yet, we don't see it in the Z-film. There, he is waving and smiling until he disappears behind the sign, and that "story" conflicts with what we see in these photos. So, what happened? What happened is that they cut out the part of the film that corresponded to these photos. Why did they do it? They did it because they didn't want JFK to be shot up there. They wanted to put the back shot off until he was behind the sign, so that it could all be presented as one shot. 

Here is the Before and After of Kennedy's condition before and after the sign.

So, on the left, he looks normal, comfortable, and relaxed. But, on the right, he looks bound in spasm, with his arms flexed, his arms lifted due to deltoid spasm, and he also has tightness in his neck and upper back. He is a spasmodic mess, but why? It can't be from the trauma of the shots because there was no damage to his spinal cord. It is most certainly not a Thorburn reaction. I spent the $45 to access Dr. Thorburn's clinical narrative from 1896 about his patient who had a crushing injury to his spinal cord at the level of C5. Think of the spinal cord like a long piece of licorice. Now imagine someone taking a pair of pliars and squeezing the cord flat at the level of C5. That's what happened to Thorburn's patient. Nothing like that happened to Kennedy. Thorburn's patient was paralyzed. All of his bodily muscles became denervated except for the few that received their nerve supply from ahove C5. So, he retained use of the Biceps, Deltoid, Superspinatus, and one other. But, the way your muscular system works is that muscles are in opposition. For example, the Biceps and the Triceps are in opposition. So, if the Biceps shortens, it's the Triceps that reverse the shortening. But, what if you don't have a working Triceps? Then, any time you twitch and shorten the Biceps, it's going to stay shortened. There is no way to reverse it. So, over a period of time, days and weeks, Thorburn's patient wound up in a state in which his few working, but unopposed, somatic muscles were shortened all the way.

So, on the left is Thorburn's patient. All of his muscles were paralyzed except the few that could still contract unopposed, so they wound up at their shortest possible length. And he was stuck like that until he died. But, JFK wasn't paralyzed at all. All his muscles were working, and we can see them working. The problem is they were working too much. He had a hyper-spasmotic condition going on, which he could not release. 

It had nothing to do with Thorburn, and it had nothing to with the shots he received because both were very shallow shots that did not damage or affect his nervous system. So, why is he responding like that?

Let's go back to the back shot, which, as I told you, occurred high on the hill, just a little past the obelisk. It was the first shot that hit him. But, why would they shoot him in the right upper back? It wasn't a lethal area.  They were trying to kill him, right? So, why didn't they shoot him in the head?

It's because they weren't trying to kill him there. They didn't want to kill him until he got to the sparsely populated grassy area in lower Dealey Plaza. That was the Kill Zone, and not before. So, this shot wasn't meant to kill him. It was a preparatory shot meant to immobilize him. 

In 1975, the Church Committee delved into the CIA "heart attack gun" which could deliver drugs by way of frozen projectiles. A CIA employee testified that the gun was developed to deliver drugs including "nerve agents" by way of frozen projectiles.  

I believe that such a gun, or one like it, was used to deliver a nerve agent to JFK. And Jackie, in her WC testimony, said that the first sign that something was wrong was that JFK had a "quizzical" look on his face. And that was before the reaction we see in the Zapruder film when he emerges sticken from behind the sign. 

For the best analysis of JFK's movements and behavior from Zapruder 225 to 237, listen to Gil Jesus.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpFHYwot6bk&t=5s

What nerve agent did they hit him with? My top suspicion is strychnine. And note that in the CIA testimony, that strychnine was mentioned as a drug for which they were developing use with the "heart attack gun." 

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2020/01/after-savage-atrocity-of-evil-trump.html

I realize full-well that a lot of people, including many whom I respect, are going to recoil from this and consider it too far-fetched. I don't fault them for being cautious and skeptical. But, I ask them to dwell on the fact that JFK's weird spasmodic condition needs to be accounted for. It was Dr. John Lattimer, a government doctor his whole career, Eisenhower's personal physician, and chief medical officer at the Nuremberg trials, who came up with the ridiculous Thorburn idea. Lattimer was a urologist, not a neurologist, and it shows. His analysis is bogus and worthless. Either JFK had a spastic upper motor neuron disease or he was hit with a nerve agent. And he did not have a spastic upper motor neuron disease.