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

This boy was, allegedly, exposed to a nerve agent in Syria, and we can compare him to JFK.

Nerve agents work by blocking an enzyme called cholinesterase which deactivates the neurotransmitter acetylcholine when it is supposed to be deactivated. What we are seeing on Kennedy is very dyskinetic. We are seeing muscle spasticity on him which he cannot release. Jackie tries to coax him to put his arm down, but she has little success. 

Even with two hands, she has little success. She's gotten his elbow on that side lower, but that's it.  Notice that his fist is just as high. Why doesn't he put it down? 

He is all bound up there, and it cannot be attributed to physical trauma. He was fine just a few seconds before, and he was fine all morning. It happened suddenly upon his being shot, and damage from a bullet can't account for it. Prior to the fatal head shot, there was no damage to his nervous system.  

Moreover, those who claim that he was shot in the back with a bullet have a hell of a lot of explaining to do. We know that the projectile, whatever it was, only penetrated his back an inch, so what could account for that? Some have tried to claim that it was a "short charge" that not enough gunpowder was packed into the bullet to give it the momentum to penetrate more than an inch. But, that is ridiculous. If that were true, then it would not have had the momentum to reach him at all. And it could not have been accurately fired. And why would they want to do that? It's been claimed that the purpose was to plant a bullet in JFK's back that would appear to have come from Oswald, but that is ridiculous too because no bullet was found. And why not just shoot him in the head from behind and be done with it? There is just no way to rationalize him being shot with such a weak bullet. It is ridiculous to say it happened by accident, and it is ridiculous to say it happened on purpose. And, it leaves you realizing that it wasn't a bullet, but rather, a dissolving ice-dart which was designed to superficially enter and then burst in his back delivering a nerve agent.  And we are seeing the effects of it above. 

There is absolutely no doubt that, physically, the back shot only caused a superficial wound in his back that was trivial. For all practical purposes, it was a scratch. It cannot possibly account for the behavioral changes in Kennedy that we see in the Zapruder film.     

And we have the Church Committee evidence from 1975 that the CIA had a gun that could do this, (they had the gun) and they specifically said that it could deliver a nerve agent. 

JFK was hit with a nerve agent. It is the only thing that explains his sudden, bizarre behavior, both physical and mental.  And it is the only thing that gives purpose and explanation to the back shot, which otherwise, is a complete enigma. Unless one supports the official story, I don't understand why anyone would fight this.