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

 On the left is a goat that was exposed to a nerve agent in a military experiment. On the right is a drawing of a nerve agent victim. You see the similarity to JFK.

JFK was NOT still reacting to the throat shot in this image. He resolved that by putting his hand over his mouth and coughing. That resolved the obstruction. So, he was done with that, and you can't blame his peculiar arrangement on that.

And you can't blame his back brace either. The fact is that he was stuck in spasm, and it was due to the nerve agent that was shot into him high on the hill.

Neither the very shallow back shot nor the puncture wound in his throat caused any damage to his brain or spinal cord. So, you can't blame his dyskinesia on that And, if he had suffered a brain or cord trauma, it would have caused paralysis, just as it did to Dr. Thorburn's patient, not spasticity. JFK had spasticity.

And he had more than spasticity. He had a complete mental collapse. It was like he was extremely inebriated and to the point of being unable to talk or communicate in any way. He also lacked the mental wherewithal to perceive the situation he was in and respond to it. Again: he had no traumatic brain injury, and yet, something was terribly wrong with his brain. His conscious, rational brain was not working. Mentally, he was reduced to less than a child; it was more like infancy. He could take no evasive action. Something as simple as hunkering down in the limo he couldn't do. Again: he had no brain injury. Poisoning is the only thing that can explain it.

The people who are fighting me on this want to ignore the fact the CIA did develop a weapon to do this, and they definitely had it in 1963. The Director of the CIA said so, and he said that it worked; that it was effective.

And I assure that a bullet did NOT traverse Kennedy's neck. None of the doctors at Parkland or Bethesda thought that happened. It wasn't until the next day that Humes talked to Perry and found out about the throat wound that the idea arose. So, what was the logical thing to do in that situation? It was to go back to the body and dissect it to find out if the back wound and the throat wound were connected. Do you realize the degree of certainty that was available to them about this? And I mean the degree of certainty to determine if it did or didn't. And yet, they didn't do it. They just did it be fiat. They just declared that it did. They didn't subject it to proof, even though they easily could have done it. It was hanging there like a ripe fruit waiting to be picked, but they wouldn't do it.

Humes was a coward. He should have said, "I know you are my superior officers, but I am the doctor here. Now, either you are going to let me go back in and find out what happened to him, or I am going to tell this country- and the world- that you are obstructing justice. Either you let me do it, or it's friggin' war. Take your choice." That's what he would have said if he was a real man. But, he wasn't. He was a mouse.