My Refutation of James Fetzer 

by Ralph Cinque

Jim Fetzer and I agree about some things, such as, that Lee Harvey Oswald was standing in the doorway of the Book Depository during the JFK assassination, and that Jack Ruby did not shoot Oswald, that Ruby was being detained already up on the 5th floor, and FBI Agent James Bookhout masqueraded as him at the Garage Spectacle. 

However, there are some things we disagree about, and foremost is the explanation for the shot that hit JFK in the back, just to the right of the third thoracic vertebra. 

The diagram was made by Dr. George Burkley, who attended the autopsy at Bethesda. And what he and the other doctors found was a clean round entrance wound with a prominent abrasion collar that lacked any missile. They probed it with their pinkies. It went an inch and a half and then seemed to stop. 

And they thought the neck wound was just a tracheotomy. It wasn't until the next day, when Humes spoke to Perry, that the former found out that there had been a bullet wound there. 

So, at the time, what did Humes think caused the breathing obstruction that necessitated the tracheotomy? What did he think JFK was choking on?  I can't answer that, and I don't know that he ever did. 

But, I do know that the admirals in the room wouldn't let him dissect JFK's back to find out where the back wound went. The next day, after talking to Perry, Humes accepted the wild theory that the apparently shallow back wound actually traversed JFK's body and exited his throat. At the time, there was no talk of it going on to traverse Connally. That didn't come until 5 months later with Arlen Specter. 

But, if they thought that, why didn't they go back and open up Kennedy just to prove it? Neither I nor anyone else can answer that. 

And no spectator reported seeing Kennedy being shot in the back. Of course, the story became that the back shot and the throat shot were one, and spectators did report seeing JFK raise his hands to his throat. However, Fetzer and I agree that the back shot was a separate shot that came well before the throat shot. So, when JFK was shot in the back, it should have been seen and heard, right? So, why didn't spectators report it? 

Jim thinks that JFK was shot in the back with an FMJ bullet that was sabotted. A sabot is a supportive device that is used to make a small bullet fit a weapon with a larger bore. According to Fetzer, the purpose of the back shot was to implant one of Oswald's bullets into Kennedy.  Hmm. Then, why did they need a sabot? Why didn't they use the same kind of weapon as Oswald's supposed rifle? (He didn't actually own a rifle.) But, if planting one of Oswald's bullets into Kennedy was the goal, they certainly didn't need a sabot. 

As it turned out, the missile, whatever it was, did very little damage because it didn't penetrate very far, and it did not strike any vital tissue. It only went through skin, fascia and muscle. If it had gone deeper, it would have entered his lung, and obviously, that would have been serious. It wouldn't necessarily have killed him, but it could have. 

So, why speak of planting one of Oswald's bullets into Kennedy? Why not just kill him with it? According to Fetzer, they used old ammunition from the 1940s, and the charge was so weak, that it ran out of energy and was stopped by JFK's soft tissues. But, does Jim think they deliberately did that because all they wanted to do was plant the bullet and not actually hurt him? Or does he think they did it out of stupidity by using old expired ammunition? I can't say for sure, but since Jim has expressed their intention as just wanting to plant an Oswald bullet into Kennedy. So, it sounds like he thinks they did it on purpose. However, it doesn't make a lick of sense because they could have easily done both: planted an Oswald bullet into Kennedy and killed him with it. I mean, why not?

However, Dennis Cimino has pointed out that if the bullet's energy was so weak as to be stopped in an inch and a half of travel thru JFK's soft tissues, then it never would have reached him in the first place. If it's propulsive force was that weak, gravity would have brought it down before it ever reached Kennedy. There would have been no way to control and deliver such a defective bullet to its target with such a weak charge.   

And Dennis is also right that if JFK's tissues were resistant enough to stop the bullet in an inch and a half, that they would have taken it out on the bullet, meaning, it would have mushroomed. But, Fetzer maintains that the unspoiled "Magic Bullet" was the bullet that stopped so short. 

And what happened to the bullet? According to Jim, it fell out and was found on the floor of the limo. Try to picture that. JFK is shot in the back through 3 layers of closing. Then, somehow, the bullet comes out of his back, through the three holes in the three garments, which conveniently remained aligned. And then it fell to the seat and then somehow went from there to the floor. 

There is an alternative story to that by SS Agent Paul Landis who claimed that the bullet came out of Kennedy's back and got stuck in the upright back support of the seat, and that he took it into the hospital. He didn't make this claim until 55 years later. I give no credence to his story or Fetzer's. 

So, what really happened? What really happened is that JFK was hit in the back high on the hill on Elm Street just past the intersection. He wasn't hit with a metal bullet. It was made of ice, and it contained one or more toxic agents, which undoubtedly included a nerve agent. And we we can see the effects of that nerve agent in the Zapruder film, where JFK lost control of his muscles. 

What you are seeing there is JFK's inability to release his arms; to put them down. Poor Jackie is trying to coax his arm down, but to no avail. It is a neuromuscular disorder; the toxic effect of a nerve agent. But, that's only part of the spectrum of what happened to him. He also suffered a complete mental collapse, where his ability to be aware of what was happening, to respond to it, and to communicate completely vanished. It was like a chemical lobotomy. JFK never said anything after being shot in the back. There was the lie by Roy Kellerman that Kennedy yelled, "I've been hit!" but that never happened, and it's widely accepted that it never happened. The last words that Kennedy spoke in his life were to Nellie Connally, who said to him, "You can't say that Texans haven't turned out for you." to which he responded, "I certainly can't." Those were his last words. 

So, what happened to the ice bullet after it struck Kennedy is that it burst. Ice is very hard, but it is also unstable. It's a delicate gem-like structure; a crystal. It is the crystalline form of water. There is a lot of space between the hydrogen and oxygen atoms. Haven't you had the experience of having an ice cube burst when digging it out of its tray? It's startling when it happens. I can remember being startled by it as a young boy. It really scared me for a second. And then I wondered: where did the ice cube go? In this case, the bursting of the ice bullet was planned. It was intentional. I'm sure that years of experimentation went into this and probably using human subjects.  Do you know about the Edgewood Arsenal? That's where the Nazi weapons engineers and scientists were set up to do their nefarious work- now on our behalf. That's probably where the "heart attack gun" was developed. 

That was a real. operative weapon, made public by the Church Committee in 1975. It was battery-operated with a range of 150 yards. It delivered an ice flechette laced with poison. It could deliver a drug that would mimic a natural heart attack. It could also deliver a nerve agent, such as paralytic shellfish toxin. Its impact felt like nothing more than a mosquito bite. It's very likely that a gun like that was used on JFK to deliver the nerve agent and whatever else was in that toxic brew that they shot into him high on the hill.

Jackie knew that there was something wrong with JFK long before he was shot in the throat. She said in her WC testimony that the first thing she noticed was that he had a "quizzical" look on his face. And she was turned looking at him before the limo reached the phony freeway sign in the Zapruder film. 

Here is Z-193. Observe that she has stopped working her side of the street. Instead, she is turned and looking at her husband.

Notice that the back of her pill-box hat is facing the south side of Elm. Her face is facing JFK. She is looking at him. So, why is she doing that? She was a political wife, and this was a political trip. It was all about winning Texas in the upcoming election. So, why did she stop doing her job? It's because she knew there was something wrong with her husband. Now, regarding his image, it can't be trusted. They did a lot of alterations. 

Does that look like authentic photography to you? It doesn't to me. I think the paint came out. Here's another:

 So, that's frame 205, and it looks like Kennedy put his hand over  his face. I'm sure he didn't do that. Paint, paint, paint. He surely had a distressed look on his face, due to the powerful changes that were taking place within him from the poisoning he underwent. 

The biggest challenge they had with the Zapruder film was to remove the visible signs that JFK was shot in the back long before he was shot in the throat.  

You can also see Jackie looking at JFK in the Willis photo that was taken right before the throat shot.

There, you can plainly see that Jackie was not working her side of the street. She is turned and looking at JFK. And it's widely agreed that this was before the throat shot. So, supposedly, he hasn't been shot at all yet. However, I'm telling you that he was already shot in the back. It happened shortly before the Croft photo.

That is a phony image of Jackie's face. I know where they got it from. It was from a televised program in December in which Jackie thanked Americans for their cards and letters. 

That's the same image, horizontally flipped. 

Why would she have had an expression like that there? If nothing has happened yet, why isn't she smiling and waving and beaming? Why does her hair look so freaky and unnatural? Look at that sharp angle on our right? Does hair behave like that? Of course not. They were using her hair to cover up JFK's face. He was no doubt reacting to being shot in the back there. Maybe his mouth was open, and no doubt his eyes were open too. probably with a startled look. They doctored the hell out of that photo. 

Nothing but poisoning can explain JFK's muscular dyskinesia and complete mental collapse, as seen in the Zapruder film. Trauma cannot explain it. The only trauma he received to that point was a shallow, innocuous wound in his back, and a trauma to his throat in which his trachea was damaged, and he had a mild contusion on his lung, but neither of these could have impaired his muscular system or his mind. Only poisoning can explain his freakishly bizarre behavior, as seen in the Zapruder film. 

Now, let's finish on Fetzer. His absurd explanation to account for the back shot, that it was a sabotted bullet intended to plant an Oswald bullet into Kennedy just for show, not to harm him, is ridiculous. It is preposterous. His claim that the bullet fell out and wound up on the floor of the limo is preposterous. His claim that a weak bullet with insufficient charge could have reached JFK at all is preposterous. His claim that they used expired ammunition from the 1940s is preposterous. Everything about his explanation is preposterous. 

The first person that I know of to suggest that JFK was hit with a drug-laced ice bullet was Steve Kober, and you can read his explanation on Education Forum. Thank you, Steve. 

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/15516-jfk-hit-with-paralysising-ice-bullet/

 

 

You should read this narrative by Oswald's doctors who describe the condition he was in when he got to them.  And that condition was: very close to death. He was exsanguinated. He had lost practically all of his blood. And he showed the signs of a person who was very close to death. It was hopeless. 

https://www.upi.com/Archives/1963/11/24/Physician-says-Oswald-lethally-injured-by-time-he-arrived/8181204553842/

But, what I want you to realize is that a person in that condition is going to look ghastly. I could even say ghostly, as in white as a sheet. Oswald, at the time, was moribund, meaning very close to death. 

Yet, this is the final image of Oswald, and he doesn't look anything close to that. This man on the stretcher isn't Oswald. It is a staged photo, taken afterwards, and nothing about it makes sense. Presumably, Michael Hardin, the ambulance driver is pushing the stretcher, but he has his hand on Oswald's raised right forearm. How could he be pushing on it when the result would be to push the arm down? What is holding Oswald's arm up? And how could Oswald be making a fist? An exsanguinated person can't do that. And Detective Charles Dhority is clutching Oswald's left hand, but why? And how? How could they be going anywhere when Dhority has got Oswald's hand? Are they supposed to all be in motion together? Who would move that way? But, they are obviously not in motion. It is a staged photo. 

And one final thing: Why isn't Harold Wayne Wolfe, who was Herdon's assistant, not there at the foot of the stretcher? Why is it another man, whose back is conveniently to us, so that we can't see who he is? It indicates that they couldn't get Wolfe for this reenactment.  Are you aware that both Hardin and Wolfe died suspicious deaths? Hardin, supposedly, died of a heart attack at age 39. I realize that that can happen, but it is exceedingly rare. Plus, you can see how slender he was. Mathematically speaking, the odds of him having a heart attack at 39 were infinitesimal. Wolfe supposedly committed suicide even though he was the father of three sons. 

The conclusion from all this is that they didn't want to show us a real photo of Oswald upon arriving at Parkland precisely because he looked so bad, so ghastly, it may have generated sympathy for him and even more questions about how he died. So, they made this phony one. 

The Dallas Police, in conjunction with the FBI, murdered Oswald. The Garage Spectacle was just theater; he wasn't shot then. He was shot afterwards in the PD. They had silencers for 38s back then. And Jack Ruby had no involvement in it. He was already upstairs being held on the 5th floor. He got there much earlier than 11:17. Ruby told the Warren Commissioners that he sent the money wire to Karen Carlin at 10:15, and he was right. A Secret Service agent corrected him right away, but Ruby had it right. He was upstairs in the 5th floor jail, reduced to his underwear, at the time the Garage Spectacle went down.  

What it really comes down to is evil: the evil then, and the evil now, for today, government and media continue to lie about the JFK assassination, which means they have blood on their hands. They are accessories after the fact in JFK's murder, and the murders of others. 

On the weekend, it was JFK, Tippit, then Oswald, and I don't claim to have the low-down on Tippit. He may have been involved in the plot. So, why was he killed? Was it to make Oswald a cop-killer in the hope that it would make for itchy trigger fingers in the theater? It may have been just that, but then again, they may have had other reasons for killing Tippit. But regardless, JFK, Oswald, and Tippit were all fathers of young children. So, the evil involved in killing Tippit was no less than the other two.  

The absurdity of the official story is resounding, not only because we know Oswald was standing in the doorway during the shooting, and we have a photograph of him there...

which identifies him and his clothing, but because the whole official story is absurd, from the Single Bullet Theory, to the obviously phony evidence of Oswald having mail-ordered a rifle, to the patently fraudulent Backyard photos, to the complete absence of any plausible motive for Oswald to do such a thing, and more. 

And what permeates the American landscape today is a strange mix of evil and stupidity. For anyone to actually believe the official story of the JFK assassination takes an extraordinary degree of stupidity. But, the pressure to believe it is great and unrelenting. It weighs even on the Kennedy family and on the JFK Presidential Library. 

It is often said that the United States is an empire built on debt, and that is true. But, it is also an empire built on lies. And the lie about JFK goes to the hub of the whole twisted fabric of lies that dominate American society. The JFK lie is one of the core lies, and standing up to it is the duty of every person who respects the competence of their own mind. 

 Mike Duncan

The story I originally heard was that the Secret Service was trying to spirit JFK’s body back to Washington for Jackie’s sake. But the Secret Service was really under orders by LBJ to get the body out of Dallas for nefarious reasons. LBJ did not want JFK’s autopsy done at Parkland. Why was this? And we now know that all of the photos of JFK’s body done by the autopsy team at Bethesda were altered. This was later confirmed by the doctors at Parkland Hospital. LBJ had blood in his hands. It’s why we have thousands of documents relating to JFK’s assassination still classified.

• 1h

  about an hour ago
• Like
• Reply
• Share

Active

Ralph Cinque

Author

Top contributor

Mike Duncan The bottom line is that the U.S. Government killed Kennedy, and the U.S, Government, with the help of their media minions, covered up what they did with a false story about Oswald. And by the way, they also killed Oswald and pinned it on the hapless, clueless Jack Ruby who was not in the Basement at the time. He was already being held up on the 5th floor. The same people who killed Kennedy killed Oswald and precisely because they knew that their lies would be exposed at his trial.