The John F. Kennedy Assassination Homepage

Feedback (Closed)

Dear Readers,

This section is closed, no more entries can be submitted. It seems to be impossible to establish a serious and neutral discussion, without any assaults, harrasments, blames etc. Interesting enough, 99 percentages of those disturbances were caused by defenders of the Lone Assassin Theory. I am tired of editing and filtering blames and accusations after 15 years.

Sorry for this. Keep asking questions! One day, they will be heard...


« Previous | Next »

On 24-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:

Earlier I mentioned a bullet found in the grass on the left of the motorcade that was picked up and pocketed by an "SS/FBI" person. I was told that no such evidence existed.

If you run a search for "The JFK Autopsy Photos" a site comes up "JFK-Fact or Fiction". On this site there is a series of photos showing this bullet and the "SS/FBI" person pocketing the bullet.

There are also many other sites, and pages, listed that give good information here.

One piece is that multiple cigarette butts and footprints were found in the mud behind the picket fence at the location multiple witnesses say they saw evidence of a weapon being fired.

On 21-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:

I need to explain myself here. I have made multiple comments on this site. The questions I raise are questions I have formed from personal research and experience.

There are some very questionable conspiracy theories out there. I do not "buy in" to many of these extreme theories.

I do however believe that a cover up was instituted by men in very powerful positions that wanted the American public to believe in a "lone assassin and a single bullet". People who would profit highly if the Kennedy Dynasty was stopped.

I know from personal experience that Black Ops is a fact. That TV shows such as "The Unit" portray in a fictional basis what is actually true in real life. These "Units" exist. Also that movies such as the "Borne" series portray in a fictional format what is in actuality real. There are "Jason Bornes" out there. There are men trained by our Government to be assassins. They could be your neighbor next door and you would never know. Personal experience.

So for me to believe that a group of high powered Politicians and big money business men were behind canceling the Kennedy Dynasty is far more believable than a lone crazy, firing a Crap weapon, from a lousy position, killing the President and wounding the Governor, with a single bullet? A very emphatic YES!! You better believe that I believe it took more than Oswald to accomplish what took place in Dealey Plaza in November 63 and the years that followed.

A couple of thoughts; Mr. Dulles was the Head of the CIA in Nov 63. Dulles was also the lead on the Warren Commission. George Bush was in the CIA and also present in Dallas on Nov 22, 1963. Richard Nixon was in Dallas Nov 22, 1963. Gerald Ford was a member of the Warren Commission. LBJ made it clear he wanted to be President and that Kennedy was ruining his political career. Most people knew that Bobby would be President following John's second term, continuing the Kennedy Dynasty. The Secret Service did not follow any of their Standard Operational Procedures in Dallas; including two men on the rear bumper of the Presidential Limo, sweeping all buildings along the parade route closing all windows, accelerating out of the area at the first hint of trouble, jumping from the front passenger seat the cover the President at the first hint of trouble, not stationing agents along the parade route, allowing the motorcade to make two very slow turns when there was a straight route to the destination,......

Questions, Questions, Questions........

On 21-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:


In response to your first response to my post.

A. What I presented here was what I have read and researched on other sites. It was stated on several sites that the Committee had found that 4 shots were fired and "most likely two gunmen were involved". I'll re-research for specific sites.

B. Possibly re-read Brennan's testimony. I just did. He saw "someone" in the window. He identified Osawld as the closest match to the person he saw. (read elsewhere the description of the men in these line ups. Only Oswald matched the description sent out by the PD.) Brennan was only "positive" in December of 63. The Warren Commission said his testimony was Probative, not conclusive.

Was Brennan's testimony any different than other testimony about that day?

C. Again, re-read the testimony of the Dallas PD Chief to reporters about the evidence connecting Oswald to the rifle. Then read the testimony of the Funeral Home Worker who prepared Oswald for burial about the visit by FBI/SS to take his prints, including palm prints, at the Mortuary.

Time line is everything. Oswald worked at the depository. Wouldn't his prints be on boxes all over the building? Was he assigned to the 6th floor the previous week/month to work there? were the prints in places that would be logical for a worker moving the boxes?

I still don't see any evidence, other than circumstantial, to place Oswald in the window, with the rifle, at the time of the shooting. Nothing to place him on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting.

For a conviction in court you need to place the person at the scene.

D. I'll concede that someone "tossing" the rifle between the boxes could have knocked the scope around. Re-read the description by the Dallas PD. The weapon was "rusty, in poor condition, and the scope was poorly mounted". Not the weapon was in excellent working order and the scope was knocked out of alignment. Also the ammunition was described as "old".

E. A Marine Sniper was asked to place himself in the window, with the window in the position it was in on 11/22/63 and the boxes placed as they were in photos taken by Dallas PD on the day Oswald supposedly shot from the window. He stated that with the stand pipes behind him, the window only partially open, the boxes crowding him, the weapon used,.... not possible for this decorated Marine Sniper to make the shoots.

F. Funny that I have read that the people who tried to duplicate moving from the "snipers nest" across the 6th floor through the stacks of books, dropping the weapon between the rows of boxes, then down the stairs to the 2nd floor were "winded and visibly stressed". I'll go look for the sites I read.

There were some "experiments" run in which the people walked across the cleared 6th floor and down the stairs. They were not visibly winded. They also did not have to move around the stacks of boxes before descending the stairs.

G. I have read the testimony of multiple Sharp Shooters, and Snipers, shooting the identical weapon to Oswalds, which state that they could not duplicate the 1-pause-2/3 shot sequence that is the testimony of multiple witnesses.

The experiment I am referring to is one in which they set up two torsos to represent Kennedy and Connelly in the "exact" positions they would be in when the shots occurred. Then they set up an expert marksman on a scaffold to duplicate the angle of trajectory from the 6th floor window. The torsos were made from ballistic gel, with material inside to duplicate "bones and internal organs".

The bullet, passing through the exact spot of Kennedy's wound in the back exited at or below the sternum. That is well below the neck just below the adams apple.

To line up a shot that entered JFK's back, 5-6' below collar level, out his neck just below the Adams apple, then entering Connelly below the armpit would mean JFK's head would have to be touching Connelly's seat back.

Getting off three shots in the the seconds allotted may be possible without aiming. But to duplicate the shot sequence that everyone seems to agree on, 1-pause-2/3, where the second and third shots are on top of each other, is not possible with a bolt action rifle in the hands of a mediocre shooter.

From personal experience. I was a Qualified Marksman in the service (mediocre). I was shooting a well maintained M-1 bolt action carbine. I could not duplicate three shots, as fast as I could possible fire and rechamber a round, while hitting the target. ANYWHERE on the target. The Gunnery Range instructor, who was a qualified Sniper, demonstrated the firing sequence that Oswald supposedly accomplished in the seconds allotted. Just firing three shots in the allotted seconds? Yes. Firing to hit the target in the shoulder and head? No.

Based on personal experience you will have to do a lot to convince me that the firing sequence is possible by anyone, even a qualified Marine Sniper.

On 20-Nov-2009, Alan Schofield wrote:


I realize that the issue of whether it was the House or the Senate is a monor one but my main point was to emphasize that their conclusions were not exactly as you portrayed and later analysis called into serious question the acoustics evidence on which they based their belief in a conspiracy of some sort. If there WAS a conspiracy we must be willing to believe the following:

1. That they didn't attempt to hide the fact that there was a conspiracy. If both gunmen were firing from the SAME location then it might be possible to hide the fact that there were two gunmen, assuming they used the same type of ammunition and fired from the same type of rifle, but as soon as you place two gunmen in DIFFERENT locations then you've just announced to the world that there was a conspiracy and both gunmen need to be found. This just doesn't make sense for an elaborate conspiracy.

2. We must believe that this highly trained assassin located to the right front not only missed Kennedy (which ALL medical experts agree on) but he also missed Governor Connally, he missed the President's wife, the Governor's wife, he missed hitting the limousine itself, he missed hitting either of the SS agents in the front of the vehicle, and he missed everyone on the opposite side of the street where spectators were standing. This is simply too much for me to believe.

3. You have to believe that this alleged frontal gunman failed to leave behind ANY forensic evidence that he was ever there. No shell casings, no incriminating footprints, and not even a figure to appear in any of the photographs that show the grassy knoll around the time of the shooting. In fact Lee Bowers who was stationed behind the picket fence never said that he saw any gunman fleeing the scene immediately after the shooting, and please remember that behind the picket fence were hundreds and HUNDREDS of wide open space providing no cover of any sort for a gunman to hide in.

For me, these points are too great to concede. There simply isn't ANY evidence of any frontal gunman. The doctors at Parkland who initially stated they felt the throat wound was an entrance later clarified their statements adding that it could have been an entrance OR an exit wound. It had the characteristics of either. And when those clarifications are coupled with the later findings of abrasion collar bruising around the back wound (typical of ENTRANCE wounds only) and the fibers on Kennedy's jacket and shirt being pushed INWARD on the back and his shirt fibers being pushed OUTWARD on the front, that settles the issue for me 100%. That is irrefutible evidence of a rear entrance and frontal exit wound. No question about about it.

Additionally, please remember Jon that if believe the throat wound was en entrance you have a LOT of explaining to do don't you? You have to explain the following:

1. What happened to the bullet that entered the rear of President Kennedy's upper back? It wasn't in his body remember because his body was x-rayed and NO bullets were discovered. It wasn't in the vehicle because no bullets were recovered in the vehicle--only the fragments from the head wound.

2. What happened to the bullet you claim entered the FRONT of the president's throat? That is a second bullet you now have to account for.

3. Where was the gunman who struck Governor Connally? Remember that for the bullet to strike Governor Connally where it actually struck him it would HAVE to pass through President Kennedy first. You need to explain where that gunman was located so that his position will line up perfectly with Connally's wounds.

4. You have to explain why Governor's back wound was oblong and NOT neat and round. What caused that bullet to be thrown off kilter and warble prior to slamming into Governor Connally's back. Because remember that Connally's back wound was nearly four-times as long as it was tall. Good luck explaining that.

I think you have your work cut out for you Jon. Incidentally an earlier poster (I believe his name was Scott) stated that your claim of seeing a photograph of the throat wound prior to surgical alteration was false. I too would like to know where you saw that photograph. I don't believe any such photograph exists.

On 19-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:


Thanks for responding. I don't have time right now to respond to you.

Everything I have put on this web site has been presented elsewhere with evidence to back it up.

Whether it was the Senate or House, there was a committee formed and findings were published. Because I said Senate rather than House doesn't make it untrue.

On 18-Nov-2009, Alan Schofield wrote:

I am amazed that no one has written a rebuttal to the many claims made by Jon. Since there is silence on this site I will be forced to do so:

A. Jon claimed that "the Senate Commission on Assassinations decided that there were at least 4 shots and two shooters."

First of all the Senate never investigated the assassination. It was the House of representatives that did the investigation and their findings were that ONE person struck Kennedy with all shots (Oswald) and no one else struck the President or Governor Connally. Based on acoustic evidence (which was discredited in 1981 when the National Academy on Science reviewed the HSCA methods and finds) they concluded that a fourth shot was fired but missed. Since this finding was later discredited it is not fair to paint the picture that the government concluded there was a conspiracy. They did no such thing.

B. Jon also stated that "Oswald was never connected to the "snipers nest".

This is patently false. Oswald was seen in the snipers nest before and during the assassination by Howard Brennan, and Oswald prints were found all over the sniper's nest including his palm print on a couple of boxes there.

C. Jon wrote that: "His prints were not found on the weapon until after a visit to the Mortuary by SS agents when they took his prints, including palm prints, posthumously."

This isn't true. There is conclusive evidence that Oswald's prints were on the rifle prior to the rifle being flown to Washington D.C. the night of the assassination (long before Oswald was shot and killed by Ruby Sunday morning.) Additionally, these prints were lifted and are still in the possession of the National Archives. There is irrefutible proof that the rifle NEVER left the DPD evidence room unsupervised (meaning there is NO evidence to support claims of a midnight trip to the mortuary to plant Oswald's prints no the rifle.) This is a silly claim made by Oliver Stone in "JFK" however there is no evidence of any such visit ever taking place.

D. Jon claimed that Oswald's weapon had a: "poorly mounted" scope.

This too is a red herring since he never explains what he means by "poorly mounted." Additionally, no one knows the condition of the scope prior to Oswald jamming it between the boxes where it was later found. The fact that the scope was misaligned when found by no means it was misaligned when he used it to shoot the President

E. Jon made the claim that the sniper's nest provided when he calls an "impossible position." This comment puzzles me. How could an unobstructed view of the President gradually moving away from him ever be referred to as an "impossible position." It was in fact the PERFECT position from which to shoot the president. The location that would have been an "impossible position" would have been firing from the grassy knoll or from behind the stockade fence. THAT should would have been nearly impossible to pull off since the President would have suddenly have appeared in view, he would have been moving from left to right and the gunman would have been in full view of anyone looking across the street from Elm.

F. Jon accurately points out that " Oswald was seen on the second floor, with no evidence of heavy breathing or stress, 90 seconds after the shots." This I agree with but how in any way does this point to Oswald's innocence. The trip from the 6th floor to the 2nd floor was duplicated time and time again at various paces (ALL of which were done in under 90 seconds) and NONE of those conducting the tests stated that they were in any way winded or short of breath. So while this may SOUND incriminating it in no way established Oswald's innocence.

G. Jon wrote: "More than one Expert Marksman unable to duplicate Oswald's shots. No one has been able to duplicate the shot sequence with "Oswald's" weapon, or even a similar weapon in excellent condition. The scientific experiment set up to prove the "one shot" theory actually proving that it could not have been one shot."

The truth is 180 degrees the opposite. Oswald's three shots in 5.6 seconds were not only matched but bettered on several occasions. But this timing was later found to be incorrect since the first shot was determined to have been fired at frame 160 and the final shot at frame 312. This gave Oswald an ACTUAL firing time of 8.4 seconds. MUCH MORE than enough time to accurately hit the president two times. In the U.S. Marines Oswald fired better than that on several occasions and could have easily pulled off two hits and a miss in 8.4 seconds.

On 16-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:

There is a 9 part series on line titled: "The Men Who Shot Kennedy". Even if only 50% of what they present in this series is true, there is way too much evidence that exists to NOT question the Warren Report & the Bethesda Autopsy report.

The Senate Commission on Assassinations decided that there were at least 4 shots and two shooters.

Still, there are more unanswered questions than factual answers from the "one shot, one shooter" side. Too many witness statements, too many outside Expert statements, that contradict the "official" conclusions.

Oswald was never connected to the "snipers nest". His prints were not found on the weapon until after a visit to the Mortuary by SS agents when they took his prints, including palm prints, posthumously. A "rusted" weapon with a "poorly mounted" scope. An impossible position in the "snipers nest" with stand pipes in the way and trees between the weapon and the target. Oswald was seen on the second floor, with no evidence of heavy breathing or stress, 90 seconds after the shots.

More than one Expert Marksman unable to duplicate Oswald's shots. No one has been able to duplicate the shot sequence with "Oswald's" weapon, or even a similar weapon in excellent condition. The scientific experiment set up to prove the "one shot" theory actually proving that it could not have been one shot.

Oswald was not Super Man. He was Joe Average. A puppet of the FBI & CIA.

On and on and on......

On 11-Nov-2009, Lizbeth Anne wrote:

I know the source for the Secret Service phone call to Parkland and it is a red herring. Linda, who seems to know a lot about the case, should know better than to refer to this innocuous statement. I can only assume Linda hopes no one will ever look up the actual state and the context in which it was given. Sorry, Linda. I did. The testimony is of nurse Jane Carolyn Wester in which she said, and I quote exactly from her Warren Commission testimony, "At noon, around noon---noontime---I'm not sure as to the exact time it was. I was relieving the secretary for lunch and the phone rang. Someone in the pathology department asked if the President were in the operating room and I answered them, "No," and they said that a Secret Service agent was down there and as soon as the President did arrive in the operating room, would I please call them."

Now what do we learn from the ACTUAL testimony rather than from Linda's convenient summary?

1. The nurse stated under oath "I'm not sure as to the exact time it was." This speaks volumes. As with ANY normal human, Nurse Wester didn't sit on a chair and stare at the clock while at work. She knew it was sometime "around noon--noontime" when she received a phone call to see if the president was in the operating room (he never WAS in the operating room incidentally). Later, MONTHS later, she tried to recall the time and recollected that it was some time around the noon hour, but she admitted she didn't know when. To interpret her statement to mean that the clock was just chiming 12 bells when the phone call came is silly and unrealistic.

2. Jane said she was just relieving another nurse that was going to take her lunch break. But this in no way implies that it was exactly 12:00. A LOT of employees have to stagger their lunch breaks with other employees. One goes at 12:00 and then returns and relieves another that leaves at 12:30, who then returns and relieves another at 1:00. This is how the real world operates.

3. To believe that the Secret Service of the United States government was clever enough to orchestrate the assassination of the President they were sworn to protect, they were smart enough to get Oswald's a job in the TSBD, they were smart enough to hide assassins all around Dealey Plaza (none of whom are ever seen or who leave behind any evidence of their existence) and yet at the same time they are too dumb to even know when the President would be brought to Parkland Hospital is silly and childlike in its very nature.

So what is it? Is the Secret Service one of the most ingenious organizations in modern World history in that they were able to kill their own leader without getting caught or are they a bumbling group of Keystone Cops who cannot get straight the time the President is scheduled to arrive at Parkland?

You can't have it both ways.

Of course there IS a third option. Nurse Wester simply guesstimated as to the time she received the phone call; she knew it was around noon--noontime (which it was) and the phone call meant nothing more than she was to notify the pathology department as soon as the president was sent to the operating room. THAT appears to be the simplest and most logical explanation.

On 11-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:

And yet again with the McAdams Site.

I just reviewed the Magic Bullet sections. Even the Experimental firing of a bullet through a human wrist.

I agree that Connally was lower than Kennedy by 4-6 inches. I agree that Connally turning to his right would put his wrist between his chest and left thigh. A straight trajectory could be lined up.

I question, highly question, the experimental firing through a wrist bone producing another "pristine" bullet. A bullet hitting a rib and shattering it, then hitting the wrist and shattering it, would be mushroomed. Every bullet I have ever seen, I've seen plenty, that has hit anything as dense as a human bone has mushroomed.

Before I "buy" this experiment as proof, I would need to personally witness the experiment.

As I have read through these "proofs", in multiple sections of the McAdams site, that the single shooter. single bullet, theory is the truth, I see that they can also disprove what they are trying to prove.

On 11-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:

Ok another McAdams site comment.

I find it interesting that the fact that the Bethesda Autopsy Doctors confirmed that the Autopsy photos and Xrays were genuine, "proves" that they were not altered, or that JFK's wounds were not altered before/during the autopsy.

Well, heck yes, they are going to identify their documents as real. What does that prove?

On 11-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:

Again to the McAdams site.

The Harpers Fragment.

Was this skull fragment actually fitted into JFK's skull before the autopsy was performed? Was it later physically fitted into the skull?

If not everything in the conclusions of the segment is purely conjecture. Neither proving, nor disproving, anything.

I have been taught that the first impression is the best. If you think about it too much you get the wrong answer.

Whether the statement came from the SS or the FBI again doesn't prove anything. It is a misquote or typo.

What did Harper say in his initial statement? That is the closest you will come to the truth of what Harper found and where.

On 11-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:

I want to get this down before I move on to more research.

McAdams site: in reference to Altgens testimony. It is stated that Altgens was mistaken because he referenced the "left" side of JFK's head exploding. It is inferred then that Altgens Testimony is questionable.

Altgens was standing on the left side of the limo facing JFK. So the wound would be on Altgens left. I see no inconsistency with someone referring to something they witnessed as being on their left (which would be JFK's right). This proves nothing except that Altgens was referring to his own left not JFK's left. It is probably more consistent that witnesses describe things from their reference point rather than from the refernce point of what they were seeing. Was Altgens asked to clarify his "left" reference?

On 11-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:

I just went to the McAdams site and reviewed a number of his (presented on his site) conclusions.

The conclusions dismiss the Parkland Doctors as not being able to "examine the wounds closely", and as being non-scientific memories. The Parkland Doctors are dismissed with the same "logic" that the "conspiracy theorists" dismiss the Bethesda Autopsy conclusions.

The conclusions on this site are all based on the Bethesda Autopsy documentation.


How can the testimony of the Parkland Hospital doctors and staff all be wrong? Why is it not possible that the skull and scalp were "repositioned" for the Bethesda Autopsy documents to appear to support the "bullet from the rear" theory? Even the photo used as evidence to support the bullet from the rear theory show huge pieces of the rear of the skull hanging down and matter visibly out side the skull. If the upper right side of the brain was "exploded", why is it not possible for Doctors to see the Cerebellum?

Another eyewitness at the Bethesda end of things is the man who's responsibility it was to remove the brain from the skull on arrival. His testimony states that there "wasn't any brain to remove". So how did the Bethesda Doctors conclude the path of the bullet "through the brain" with a small hole in the front and a large hole in the rear?

As I stated before, I do not "buy in" to every conspiracy theory that is presented. I do however have questions that have still not been answered by evidence other than by parroting the official Warren Commission report, or the official Bethesda Autopsy report.

Oh yeah... The "pristine" bullet. The McAdams site shows a picture of the slightly "squashed" rear view of the bullet as evidence that it is not "pristine". ANY bullet I have ever seen that has hit a bone has been SEVERLY distorted (smashed). The "pristine" bullet supposedly hit a rib and a wrist, yet is only slightly squashed. Show me a bullet hitting (shattering) two bones that looks like the "pristine" (magic) bullet and I'll jump on the band wagon.

I am continuing to look for that photo.

On 11-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:

In response to Artie...

I just went and reviewed the news conference with the Parkland doctors. They were clear, multiple times that the wound in the front of the neck was an entrance wound.

Also they were very adamant about not being able to determine how the head wound was caused. Whether it was 1 or 2 bullets that caused it.....

They were very clear that it was massive and that brain matter was exiting the wound while they were working on JFK.

I'll keep reviewing to answer your other questions.

In case my response from yesterday was edited/deleted..... The information about the SS Agent phoning about whether JFK had been admitted yet came from the Warren Commission Report. If you go to the list of peoples testimony and look for the nurses name you can read her testimony.

On 11-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:

The picture I saw was on an Internet site I was researching. I've been on so many I can't recall now. I will go and look for it. Perhaps it was a fake, or one used for illustration.

The point I'm trying to make is that there are too many questions. If there were only two bullets, where are they. And please don't insult me with the "magic Bullet".

As for xrays, when were they taken? At Parkland? or Bethesda after the body was reworked? Again don't insult me by saying the Bethesda Autopsy is the truth when every doctor and staff member at Parkland describes completely different wounds.

If you believe the Warren Report and the Bethesda Autopsy that's you right. But those two do not answer all the questions.

The source for the SS agent call is the Warren Commission report. It's in there.

On 11-Nov-2009, Linda wrote:

Jane Carolyn Wester testified before the Warren Commission in March of 1964, and it is all documented. She was interviewed by Arlen Specter. It is available on the internet. Hers wouldn't be the first testimony to be ignored.

And she said "shortly after noon" the call came in. Others have tried to use this to say, oh, she didn't know what time it was, it could have been later. Well if it was later she would have said so. Shortly after noon could mean from one minute to 10 or 15 minutes after NOT a half hour later which was when the President was shot. Her testimony is a true smoking gun, but then you had dozens of those, all the Warren Commission had to do was just ignore them and they did.

And regarding the bullet hole in the windshield, what difference does it make if it was front to back or freaking sideways???!!! It was ANOTHER BULLET, thereby destroying the Warren Commission findings.

Check with Robert Groden about photos, he has probably the largest collection of photos and films of any researcher. I learned of Jane Carolyn Wester's testimony from listening to They have live interviews every Thursday night then they archive them if you miss them. Listen to Rich DellaRosa's interview from last January.

On 10-Nov-2009, Artie wrote:

First, you never saw any photograph of the throat wound prior to the "mutilation" (as you call it) because NO photographs exist of the throat wound prior to the autopsy. That is blatantly false. If such a photograph exists please tell all of us where it is so we can all see it.

Second, one claims a bullet passed through the FRONT of the windshield. Please explain exactly WHERE this gunman was supposed to have been located at the time this shot was fired. Is it your contention that the gunman was directly in front of the limousine and he fired through the windshield somehow striking Kennedy in the throat? Please explain what happened to THAT bullet then? I'm sure you are aware that no bullet(s) were found in Kennedy's body and that none showed up on his full-body x-ray. So tell us where the bullet went.

Third, how did a bullet entering from the front as you claim cause Kennedy's clothing to be pushed INWARD in the back and OUTWARD on the front? This too deserves some explanation.

Fourth, what is the source for the claim of a Secret Service agent calling Parkland Hospital PRIOR to Kennedy being shot. I would LOVE to read this quote for my self. I will have that rumor destroyed in five minutes.

On 10-Nov-2009, Jon wrote:

Anyone know where I can see a complete set of the Altgens photos?

In my pursuit on line I have seen a close up photo of the hole in the windshield and read eyewitness testimony on the hole being front to back and you could stick a "pencil through it".

I also saw a picture of the wound in JFK's throat before the Trachiotomy and subsequent mutilation.

We know what the Secret Service Standard Operating Procedures were and are. Why then were so many of these procedures absent on 11/22/63? Why was such an odd route taken?

Very interesting information about the "SS" agent asking about the President at the hospital BEFORE he'd even been shot. Other than the Warren Report is there other documentation on this nurse? Is she dead, like so many others, of mysterious causes?


On 08-Nov-2009, Linda wrote:

For a perfectly clear photograph of the bullet hole in the limo windshield go to the following:

It is the 6th picture, scroll down.

On 08-Nov-2009, Linda wrote:

The Warren Commission chose to ignore the testimony of their own "expert" witnesses, namely the doctors from Parkland hospital. Who would know better than they what the wounds were and where they were in the President?? Their stories NEVER changed. Dr. Shaw stated in his Warren Commission testimony that he did not believe the one bullet made all the wounds in both Kennedy and Connally. I have read his Warren Commission testimony. Yet when you read the report it says otherwise. The Warren Report is a sham.

If you get a chance look up the Warren Commission testimony of one Jane Carolyn Wester. She relieved the Operating Room Switchboard person at Parkland Hospital at noon on 11/22/63. Shortly after she sat down she got a phone call from another hospital employee stating that a Secret Service agent was there wanting to know if the President had been brought in yet. Just one problem, the President had not even been shot yet, the motorcade was running 30 minutes behind. She was then told to help set up for a craniotomy on the President and a thoractomy. You'd think something like that would make the members of the Warren Commission start to ask some serious questions right? Naw. They just let it slide. Informtion before the fact that the President was going to be at Parkland. Oh, and for the record there were NO Secret Service agents in Dallas anywhere that day except the ones in the motorcade. None.

« Previous | Next »

Found a Typo?

Click here
Copyright by www.jfk-assassination.comLast Update: Tue, 10 Oct 2023 09:17:26 CET