The Lies of Colby: New Spartacus? McAdams...

[Albert Doyle]

I read the entire Bugliosi chapter on the brain evidence and it is nothing but an exercise in getting around the real evidence. If you take all the conspiracy advocates' brain evidence and assemble it into a case you can see it fits perfectly into the dishonest donut hole Bugliosi left in his so-called treatment that would supposedly answer all conspiracy claims the way conspiracy advocates wanted them answered. To the contrary, if you assemble all the (real) brain evidence under the assumption of a deliberate act of sabotaging of the evidence in order to cover-up a conspiracy it also fits perfectly.


Von Pein runs from the brain evidence like a vampire runs from daylight. He says there's no evidence but his actions speak louder than words. (Bugliosi's too)

[Cliff Varnell]

I read the entire Bugliosi chapter on the brain evidence and it is nothing but an exercise in getting around the real evidence. If you take all the conspiracy advocates' brain evidence and assemble it into a case you can see it fits perfectly into the dishonest donut hole Bugliosi left in his so-called treatment that would supposedly answer all conspiracy claims the way conspiracy advocates wanted them answered. To the contrary, if you assemble all the (real) brain evidence under the assumption of a deliberate act of sabotaging of the evidence in order to cover-up a conspiracy it also fits perfectly.


Von Pein runs from the brain evidence like a vampire runs from daylight. He says there's no evidence but his actions speak louder than words. (Bugliosi's too)

One big problem with the brain evidence.

It doesn't exist, for all intents and purposes. The brain is not in evidence.

JFK is not going to be dug up.

A lot of the head wound/s evidence is contradictory.

We don't know how many times he was shot in the head; we don't know if pre-autopsy surgery was conducted.

It's the grand rabbit hole of the JFK case.

I think we need to ask ourselves: Is this the kind of evidence that is going to draw younger people into the case?

Polls show millennials ain't so into it.

[Albert Doyle]

One big problem with the brain evidence.

It doesn't exist, for all intents and purposes. The brain is not in evidence.

JFK is not going to be dug up.

A lot of the head wound/s evidence is contradictory.

We don't know how many times he was shot in the head; we don't know if pre-autopsy surgery was conducted.

It's the grand rabbit hole of the JFK case.

I think we need to ask ourselves: Is this the kind of evidence that is going to draw younger people into the case?

Polls show millennials ain't so into it.

If you had a better understanding of the brain evidence you would know it doesn't have to be in formal evidence. The government trapped itself in its fatal conflicts involving that evidence that any jury like Mark Lane's Miami jury would see right away.


At some point Kennedy will be dug up. It's not a rabbit hole and will offer better evidence than the shirt forensics. But it will also help those same shirt forensics as well.


Cliff, don't undermine other advocates' attempts in order to promote your shirt evidence.

[Cliff Varnell]

One big problem with the brain evidence.

It doesn't exist, for all intents and purposes. The brain is not in evidence.

JFK is not going to be dug up.

A lot of the head wound/s evidence is contradictory.

We don't know how many times he was shot in the head; we don't know if pre-autopsy surgery was conducted.

It's the grand rabbit hole of the JFK case.

I think we need to ask ourselves: Is this the kind of evidence that is going to draw younger people into the case?

Polls show millennials ain't so into it.

If you had a better understanding of the brain evidence you would know it doesn't have to be in formal evidence.

What does "have to be" mean?

In order to interest younger people in the case the evidence needs to be far more clear-cut than a missing brain.


The government trapped itself in its fatal conflicts involving that evidence that any jury like Mark Lane's Miami jury would see right away.

I'm not talking about a jury. I'm talking about the young'uns and their inclination to wade through any convoluted evidence.


At some point Kennedy will be dug up.


...Wow...gotcher cyrstal ball working just fine I see.


It's not a rabbit hole and will offer better evidence than the shirt forensics. But it will also help those same shirt forensics as well.


Cliff, don't undermine other advocates' attempts in order to promote your shirt evidence.

Undermine?

I think the obsession with the head wound/s has been undermining JFK research for decades.

You think the Kennedy family would ever give permission for such a thing?

1

[Albert Doyle]

In order to interest younger people in the case the evidence needs to be far more clear-cut than a missing brain.

It is if you study the evidence. I suggest you catch up. There's an extensive case of incriminating evidence involving the brain that is completely separate from the matter of the brain being missing itself.

[Cliff Varnell]

In order to interest younger people in the case the evidence needs to be far more clear-cut than a missing brain.

It is if you study the evidence. I suggest you catch up. There's an extensive case of incriminating evidence involving the brain that is completely separate from the matter of the brain being missing itself.

The key here is the phrase "extensive case."

No one outside JFK head wound/s obsessives is going to sit still for an "extensive case."

The clothing/T3 back wound evidence points to specific persons of interest -- the Staff Support Group within US Army Special Operations Division at Ft. Detrick, Maryland

[Albert Doyle]

The key here is the phrase "extensive case."

No one outside JFK head wound/s obsessives is going to sit still for an "extensive case."

The brain evidence can be covered in very short order.


I don't consider myself a head wound "obsessive".


No need to attack other conspiracy evidence in order to defend the shirt forensics.

[Cliff Varnell]

The key here is the phrase "extensive case."

No one outside JFK head wound/s obsessives is going to sit still for an "extensive case."

The brain evidence can be covered in very short order.


I don't consider myself a head wound "obsessive".


No need to attack other conspiracy evidence in order to defend the shirt forensics.

It's important to distinguish between evidence of the murder, and evidence of the cover-up.

The head wound/s evidence tells us what?

That multiple shooters struck JFK?

Yeah, we already know that.

What else does it tell us?

That the medical record contains many irregularities -- which goes to the cover-up.

It does not tell us how any times JFK was shot, and we can't know for sure if there was pre-autopsy surgery to the head -- which goes to the cover-up.

The night of the autopsy the doctors openly speculated that JFK was struck with a high tech weapon, a round which wouldn't be found in an autopsy.

This was a solid lead in pursuit of the perps.

The FBI men took the speculation seriously, and one of them called the FBI Lab to get the background on such weapons.

The guy at the FBI Lab said forget about it, the Bullet is in from Dallas etc bs etc.

But the fact is that the FBI had been briefed by Charles Senseney, who worked for the US Army Special Operations Division at Ft Detrick, that
such weapons did indeed exist.

The weapons were used by a shadowy entity called the Staff Support Group -- military officers involved in a CIA operation.

Not only is the clothing/T3/throat entrance evidence the most efficient way to dispatch the SBT, far more importantly it is the only evidence which points to specific Persons of Interest.

[Albert Doyle]

I'm not sure you understand the brain evidence Cliff.


In such a case, evidence of cover-up in the brain evidence is as good as evidence of conspiracy in the murder.

[Cliff Varnell]

I'm not sure you understand the brain evidence Cliff.


In such a case, evidence of cover-up in the brain evidence is as good as evidence of conspiracy in the murder.

So what?

Yes, we know it was a conspiracy. In the words of Vincent Salandria, a "vegetable" could figure it out from the clothing evidence.

What else ya got?

Senseney fingered an air force colonel and an army colonel as Staff Support Group, both military and CIA.

Lansdale and Conein?

That's the kind of questions the clothing evidence promotes.