4 Comments
founding

Good podcast.

Two observations:

1. Regarding the "Jet Effect," that theory of Dr, Luis Alvarez, a proven liar, would never be accepted in a federal court. Under the prevailing Frye/Daubert standard, an expert opinion must have a substantial basis among peer reviewed literature of similar experts. Alvarez, as detailed by Josiah Thompson in "Last Second in Dallas" just kept shooting ANY weapon (not just Mannlicher Carcanos) at melons and gourds until he got a backward effect with a randon watermelon. "Jet Effect" is horseshit.

Regarding Dr. Perry and his observation of an entrance wound in the president's throat, the question is raised: if a BULLET entered the throat, where did it exit? (hint: it didn't). The problem may stem from a layman's viewing of the Zapruder film, where JFK is seen to clutch for his throat after 224.

The clutching motion is not necessarily directed at the throat. An entry wound to the trapezius muscles just before 224 would likely induce the same muscular reaction. We know JFK suffered such a wound (by autopsy) and we know there was no exit path for that wound.

Finally, we have the recorded recolledctions of the morticians at Gawlers Funeral Home. They not only confirmed the existence and repair of a large defect in the right lower occiput. They also reported that formaldehyde was leaking copiously from small fissures in JFK's face as the corpse was being prepared for burial. It is a logical conclusion that a frontal shot caused the first head wound at 313 and associated metal/glass wounded the president's throat and face, followed by the final head shot at 328, documented by Thompson (p. 173, n. 12-2).

So Perry was right; the throat wound was a frontal wound of entry. It just wasn't a full bullet.

Expand full comment

Well, nice job, that was filled with interesting questions and answers, and I was only going to respond to the "Oswald deployed in a mole hunt" thesis, but since the sinking of the U.S.S. Liberty was mentioned --- sure the Israelis "deliberately" sank it, but the Liberty was in a war zone during the Six Day War, and the next set of questions involve, " What ship did they think they were sinking?" FOG OF WAR.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Liberty_incident

*****

But as far as KGB deploying spies aimed at infiltrating their counterparts, of course they did, my question is what was Oswald told? What did he understand was supposed to be his role? Perhaps withheld CIA docs cast light on that. And maybe he was told something that is extremely embarrassing to the CIA, in light of the actual assassination.

Even if it was not evidence of organizing a plot to assassinate JFK --- much of this remains murky.

The fact is we cannot know, collectively, as an informed democracy, what the hell are the most astute questions on the more granular level about this, until the documents are released.

It can't be a defense for non-release of relevant documents, that showing how a "mole hunt" within an intel agency is conducted poses a threat to US national security, that's for sure.

Expand full comment