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

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 said. 

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, 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.   

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 short in JFK's back. 

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/