JFK Assassination Autopsy Details Revealed After 55 Years

Cheerful, its based on the wound Connally had on his back until the day he died.

You're also getting confused between inches and cm

Can you and your merry band of debunkers not see that you continuously embarrass yourselves, only to embarrass yourselves again and again without even noticing it? This last part of the sentence is the most irritating for me because I have to explain it over and over again. Reading the nonsense you post is entertaining. Quite impressive, but also cringe-inducing mental gymnastics. 

This is the image you uploaded. According to both you and the debunkers, the magic bullet struck Connelly's back as it tumbled sideways. 

Have you read the information on your diagram about the Entry wound?

1.25 inches is 3.175 centimeters

A 3cm wound corresponds to the length of the Carcano bullet. The people you believe to be reliable sources regarding the Kennedy assassination have claimed for decades that the wound in Connelly's back is the result of a tumbling bullet 3cm in length striking him.

They are wrong, and despite this, you persist in telling lies. 

"Before surgery, the wound measured 1.5 cm. The bullet did not leave a 3-cm wound. Yesterday I showed you that Dr. Shaw (Connelly surgeon) had increased the size of the wound from 1.5 cm to 3 cm. 

When dealing with debunkers, you are likely to encounter problems such as these, as they fail to identify errors, omissions, and flaws in the official narratives. This three-centimeter wound was used by debunkers as proof that there was a tumbling bullet, but they know most people will not bother to review the details of Dr Shaw's testimony to the Warren Commission, so they continue to fabricate it for gullible individuals. 

Dr Shaw testimony. Please read the first and second sentence.,. 

Having doubled down and now made false accusations against DR Shaw, he could not tell his ass from his elbow.. After accusing me of getting the measurements incorrect, you do not see that I am correct after reading an article on the internet???

It is entirely the responsibility of the people you look up to for getting that information incorrect. They have been misleading you for a significant period of time. The wound was 1.5cm before surgery, but during surgery, Dr Shaw made an incision and it was widened to 3cm. The wound was not caused by a tumbling bullet. Additionally, the hole in Connelly's jacket and the shirt was 1.5 cm wide.

This allegation should be withdrawn or else a record or upload should be provided proving that Dr Shaw indicated the wound was 3 cm before surgery? Don't: we need to simply dismiss everything you have said regarding Kennedy's assassination. You are hurting this doctor's good name. 

 The debunkers want the entry wound to measure 3cm so hard because it corresponds to the length of the Carcano bullet tumbling sideways.

Specter showed a 3 cm wound after surgery. The doctor corrected him here. 

According to your article. Intentionally misleading the debunkers on here and it is not surprising they fall for it. In fact, the author admits that Dr. Shaw repeated the same description of the wound on April 21, 1964. You stated that Dr. Shaw gave different sizes for the entry wound in 1963 and 1964, which is incorrect. 

In the text, describes what Dr Shaw said on March 23, 1963, "Stop misleading people.".  

It has been repeatedly demonstrated that you have failed to provide evidence. Despite attaching a link to a website that contradicts everything you stated, you continue to claim that Dr Shaw gave three different descriptions of the entry wound. This is a deliberate lie since I emphasized what the person had said about Shaw's testimony concerning the entry wound in April 1964, and they claimed Shaw reiterated the same description of the entry wound as he had provided during the Warren Commission hearing. Having been caught in a lie, you were too cowardly to correct, if you had corrected it, there would have been no problem at all, because no one is perfect. "Perhaps you have been ignorant of the fact that the Kennedy debunkers misled you, but continuing to repeat that just shows bad faith!!

You would quote it to the hilt if Dr Shaw had described a bullet entry wound measuring 3cm in length. at different times. it has been established that this information does not exist, since you have not provided a single shrewd piece of evidence in support of this claim.

I am reasonably certain that if this was sincere, you would screenshot the text and show where Dr Shaw reported the bullet entry wound was 3 cm wide. It was all in your head all along, and still lying unashamedly. This is the fourth time I asked you to be honest and you cannot help yourself. The worst part is you posted a website disputing the accuracy of your own statement of fact regarding Dr Shaw's testimony in 1964, so why would I believe you? The debunkers do not know any better and cannot perceive where you lied within your post, their eyes are always closed. Let us examine what you said and the website you linked to. 

Dr Shaw's testimony on April 21, 1964, according to Nal

The website does not support ridiculous nonsense in any way. The same 1.5 cm wound was described by Shaw in 1963 and 1964 but you lied about it.

I literally said above he described it as a 1.5mm wound, its in the screenshot you posted! lol.

"Then he told the Warren Commission on March 23, 1964 it was 1.5cm". Yep he said it.

So youre sticking to this tiny and disputed detail then? In the face of:

• Oswalds gun being found on the 6th floor with his finger prints on it
• A man matching Oswalds description seen shooting from the 6th floor
• Oswald being the only person to be on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting
• Oswald lying about being in the lunchroom
• Oswald fleeing and shooting a policeman
• Not a single speck of any bullets/bullet fragments/bullet shells other than those from Oswalds gun were discovered anywhere in Dealey Plaza, the limousine, the TSBD, Parkland Hospital or in the victims.
• Both JFK and Connally clearly reacting at the same time to being hit

The book is called The Posner Files - Case Closed and Killing the Dream, which you wont read because you dont read books.

And if you really want to know more about Shaws opinions, which at times were contradictory, from page 12 here. Basically he was influenced by Connally thinking he was hit by a different bullet.

https://www.academia.edu/38392226/Deprecated_The_Not_So_Magic_Bullet_pdf_see_the_new_version_below_

There is an obvious reason why they want the 1.2 inch wound to be the same size as the Carcano bullet

The extry wound was 1.5 cm always and can't have that size. This wound must be at least 3 cm wide for the tumbling bullet theory to work.

In order to circumvent this problem, debunkers use the size of the wound after surgery. Providing false information.

I am not one of the individuals character assassinating Dr Shaw and lying to sell books.

Connelly had an entry wound of 1.5cm when he was brought into surgery, unclothed and turned. He repeated the 1.5 cm claim repeatedly, while you lied that he gave different sizes for the entry wounds. The website even stated that, but then went on here and lied about what the website stated concerning the Shaw Testimony in April 1964. Fooling no one but your friends here.

When debunkers are lying about something that can be verified easily, what else are they lying about? Conspiracy theories are not in your headspace, but they exist for reasons like this one!

Cant see the wood for the trees, or just pretending to be clueless??

The Mafia wanted JFK dead because his brother as US Att General and his team were coming down hard on mafia bosses and their control of unions and racketeering...

Thats the Who/Why

So thats why the Mafia were suspected, but no , it was Lee H Oswald.

OK. Is there any evidence that proves, or suggests, "the mafia" were involved?

"Conspiracy theorists have long surmised the mafia was involved in the assassination due to the enmity created when JFK and his brother Robert F. Kennedy began a campaign to stop mob influence on the Teamsters labor union. When JFK was elected president in 1960, he appointed Robert as attorney general. In his new role, Robert began a very public attack on organized crime, in particular going after Jimmy Hoffa, who had been elected leader of the Teamsters union in 1957. At that time the union controlled the majority of commercial trucking in the United States. Hoffa was known to consort with major mafia bosses, the mob having already corrupted many labor unions in large cities."

"As a senator, Robert pursued Hoffa over racketeering charges, though no conviction was brought against the Teamster leader. On becoming attorney general, Robert went so far as to form a “Get Hoffa” squad to aid his quest, ultimately succeeding in bringing him to justice. In 1964 Hoffa was convicted of attempted bribery of a grand juror and sentenced to eight years in prison. But it was the earlier actions of the Kennedys that adds fuel to the assassination theory involving the mob.

When JFK was unsuccessful in overthrowing Cuban leader Fidel Castro in 1961, mafia-controlled casinos on the island remained shut down, angering American crime family bosses who had invested heavily to create a tourist destination to rival Las Vegas. Theorists suggest the mafia and Hoffa conspired to kill the president as an act of retribution."

"According to the 1994 book written by attorney Frank Ragano, who represented Hoffa, the teamster leader asked mob bosses Santos Trafficante and Carlos Marcello to arrange the assassination of President Kennedy. Ragano also claims that on the day the president was killed, he joined Trafficante in a toast. Ragano recalls a dying Trafficante confessing in 1987 to having a role in the killing, though he says the mob boss eventually came to regret not killing Robert instead of his brother."

is that enough ?

RFK continued in the same role for a year after JFK was killed. Why didnt "they" kill him then?

Why didnt "they" kill John McClellan instead though? He was the head guy in all those investigations.

"According to Hunt's widow and other children, the two sons took advantage of Hunt's loss of lucidity by coaching and exploiting him for financial gain and furthermore falsified accounts of Hunt's supposed confession"

Strong evidence there....