I shall give you the link to a presentation I have prepared for a conspiracy conference on why I believe that the shot to JFK's back was an ice flechette that contained shellfish toxin. Now, if that sounds far-fetched to you, fine. You're entitled to that. It DOES sound far-fetched. But, it's actually less far-fetched that every other theory ever proposed to explain the back shot, and I'll explain.
As you know, the Official Story has it that he was shot in the back with a bullet that traversed his body, exiting his throat, and then it traversed Connally's body through his chest, bursting a rib bone, and then it burst his wrist, and then it re-entered his body in his thigh and settled there. Talk about far-fetched. A guy shot a wild pig in the head with a comparable Carcano, and it didn't even traverse its head. Very easily, they could have tested whether that rifle and that bullet could deliver that much energy. They could have lined up animal corpses in a density comparable to Kennedy and Connally and seen whether the bullet would travel that far through that much tissue. And remember, millions of farm animals are slaughtered every day in this country, so it could be done without any extra killing. So, why haven't they done it? Because they don't want to know. They don't want to risk having to explain why it didn't work.
The Single Bullet Theory is preposterous, and I presume that most of you reading this already know that. But, what about the other theories to explain the back shot? How plausible are they?
There really is just one other theory, that he was shot in the back with a bullet, and it just stopped a little ways into his body. But, that is ridiculous because if the bullet stopped, it means that all of its energy was transferred to his body. Think of how destructive that would have been. Of course, the bullet could have been destroyed too, but either way, it would never result in the very clean wound that JFK had in his back. We're talking about a bullet that was traveling 2000 feet per second, going from that velocity to zero velocity over a distance of an inch or an inch and a half. That's impossible! Skin, fascia, and even muscle don't have that kind of stopping power. What has the most stopping power in the human body is bone, but it definitely didn't hit any bone.
But, besides the impossibility of the bullet stopping that fast over so short a distance, there are other problems with the short-shot theory. First, why shoot him in the back on the right side in the first place? They were trying to kill him, right? If they shot him on the left side, they'd at least have had a chance of hitting his heart, but even then, they would have had to shoot lower. Why deliver a non-lethal shot to Kennedy? And why shoot him in the back at all? Why not shoot him in the head?
Some of said that they were just trying to place one of "Oswald's" bullets in him. But, there was no bullet found. And the whole idea is ridiculous. Some have said that they used a sabot round, but for what purpose? If it was supposed to be one of "Oswald's" 6.5 mm/160 grain bullets, why not just use a corresponding firearm for it and be done with it? These theories are too ridiculous to even ponder.
Let's go back to the facts that we know. We know JFK was struck with some kind of missile in the back, at the level of T3, to the right of his spine. That came directly from JFK's physician, Dr. Burkley, who was there. We know that several of the doctors tried to probe it with their little finger. But, you realize that every time you do it, you're making the hole bigger and deeper. In his testimony, Humes said that they tried to probe it with a metal probe, and they couldn't even get past the fascia, which is between the skin and the muscle. So, they could not probe to the muscle. My God! How shallow was it if it didn't even reach the muscle? HOW COULD A BULLET, SPEEDING AT 2000 FT/SEC, HIT HIS SKIN AND THEN COME TO REST (ZERO VELOCITY) BEFORE IT EVEN CRACKED THE MUSCLE? It's impossible. JFK was hit with a tiny ice flachette that was designed to pierce the skin and burst. There is nothing else that is consistent with the autopsy findings. It was definitely not a bullet.
Here now is the link now to my presentation. This theory is NOT wild and far-fetched. The Official Story, which is the Single Bullet Theory, is wild and far-fetched, and the alternatives to it that have previously been offered are all wild and far-fetched. This is the most rational, lucid, and well-grounded theory of the back shot that has ever been proposed.
http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2021/04/id-like-to-speak-to-you-today-about.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.