I'm guessing that you didn't bother to read the rest of the thread before you posted your reply. I also gather that your research into forensic and ballistics evidence in the JFK case has been rather insufficient.

You're the one "spewing misinformation." Again, you appear to have posted this gaffe without reading the rest of the thread, but even then you should have known better than to make such an erroneous claim.

One, no FMJ bullet would never, ever, ever produce the kind bullet fragmentation that we see on the JFK autopsy skull x-rays. Those x-rays show a "lead snowstorm" of over 40 tiny fragments in the right-frontal region, which alone automatically rules out FMJ ammo, as world-renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Vincent DiMaio pointed out:

An x-ray of an individual shot with a full metal-jacketed rifle bullet . . . usually fails to reveal any bullet fragments at all even if the bullet has perforated bone such as the skull or spine.If any fragments are seen, they are very sparse in number. . . .(Gunshot Wounds, p. 166)

In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition.. . . In rare instances involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone. One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a 'lead snowstorm'. . . . Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug. (Gunshot Wounds, p. 318)

Are we clear? Let's review: (1) In the "rare" cases when FMJ bullets do fragment if they penetrate bone, they will only leave "a few" fragments. And (2) if an x-ray shows a "lead snowstorm," this "rules out" FMJ ammo.

Two, the alleged murder weapon was a low-velocity rifle. I quote none other than FBI firearms expert Robert Frazier, who explained this to the Warren Commission:

Mr. FRAZIER. Considerably less. The recoil is nominal with this weapon, because it has a very low velocity and pressure, and just an average-size bullet weight.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is the killing power of the bullets essentially similar to the killing power at these ranges---the killing power of the rifles you have named?
Mr. FRAZIER. No, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. How much difference is there?
Mr. FRAZIER. The higher velocity bullets of approximately the same weight would have more killing power. This has a low velocity. . . . (3 H 414, emphasis added)

I'm guessing that you didn't bother to read the rest of the thread before you posted your reply. I also gather that your research into forensic and ballistics evidence in the JFK case has been rather insufficient.

No, I didn't bother to read through most of the thread.  Why?  Did you backpedal?

The bottom line is that you stated that "FMJ bullets will never, ever, ever fragment in this manner" as you were describing a specific manner in which the bullet which struck Kennedy in the head fragmented.  I am telling you that what you are saying is simply not true.

Full metal jacketed bullets can indeed fragment in ANY specific manner when traveling at full velocity and striking a skull.

Rydberg also said the following:

-- That the "stare of death" autopsy photo does not show the damage that was visible on JFK's face during the autopsy.

-- That there are many autopsy photos missing from the official collection.

-- That he doubted that the autopsy photos in evidence are the authentic autopsy photos.

-- That he and other hospital personnel involved with the autopsy or JFK medical evidence in any way were placed under strict gag orders.

It's nice that Ryberg has skill as an artist. If he believes some of the things you attribute to him, he is a real kook.

The lack of damage to the windshield in Altgens 6 has already been pretty thoroughly explained. Yourf OP fails completely at that point, and can't be resuscitated by anything Weldon presented.

Another surreal denial that simply ignores contrary evidence.

So never mind that Weldon demonstrated with a huge enlargement of Altgens 6 that the photo shows windshield damage? Never mind that Waldon also demonstrated that some subsequent printed versions of Altgens 6 were altered to conceal the damage? I mean, he proves this for all to see in his 1999 presentation. Did you even bother to watch the video of the presentation?

And what about the windshield damage visible in some of the pre-Z256 frames of the Zapruder film in the MPI large-format version of the film? If you spend a small amount of money and buy the DVD of the MPI version and play it on a large HD flat screen TV, you can see the damage with your own eyes in at least a few of the pre-Z256 frames that Dr. Mantik discusses. We both know your theory of the shooting has no plausible explanation for that damage, which is why you won't admit its existence.

I can tell you have no idea how badly you've embarrassed yourself here.

I pointed out that Kenny O'Donnell said that FBI agents pressured him into changing his account of where he heard shots coming from. And you replied by ignoring O'Donnell's account and posed a question that assumed the whole issue was hypothetical, as if O'Donnell never said that FBI agents pressured him into changing this story.

It's as if I pointed that Ronald Reagan cut taxes and you answered by saying, "Why would he have cut taxes?" as if he did not cut taxes.

The valid question to ask is, Why did some FBI agents pressure witnesses into changing their stories, and why did they misrepresent what some witnesses told them? We know this happened. It's been documented in spades. The question is, why did it happen?

Well, it's not complicated: There was a high-level cover-up underway. Some federal agents were ordered to suppress unwelcome testimony and evidence. Some agents did not even need to be told to do this because they didn't want to be the agents who forwarded reports that contained information that contradicted the government's version of the shooting. Some agents may have actually been totally convinced that the government's version was correct and believed that therefore witnesses whose accounts contradicted that version must have been mistaken, must have "imagined" that they heard shots from the knoll, must have "imagined" that they heard more than three shots (or must have heard echoes of the three shots), etc., etc.

We see similarly serious and varied actions of cover-up and reasons for those actions in the Iran-Contra Scandal of the 1980s. Many of the personnel who aided in the attempted massive cover-up did not realize they were aiding a massive cover-up. Some of the personnel suppressed or destroyed evidence because they were ordered to do so. And some personnel, the higher-level ones, knew exactly what they were doing and why they were doing it. Moreover, the cover-up came very close to succeeding. If just a few more key documents had been shredded, the Iran-Contra conspiracy may not have been exposed for years or even decades.

Sometimes I'm almost tempted to ask if you live on a different planet or in some alternative reality where federal agents and police officers never plant evidence, never alter photos or films, never misrepresent witness interviews, never suppress evidence, never destroy evidence, never try to pressure witnesses into changing their stories, etc., etc. That's a fantasy world, not the world that we inhabit.

Do you have any idea how many times FBI agents have been caught altering evidence, suppressing evidence, giving false statements, etc., etc.?

Here's what a Google AI response says on the subject:

Documented instances of FBI personnel planting or altering evidence or official records include the following cases:

Kevin Clinesmith (2020): An FBI lawyer pleaded guilty to altering an email submitted for a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) application during the "Crossfire Hurricane" investigation. The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General Special Report found he had changed the wording of an email from another agency to incorrectly state that an individual was not a "source" for another government agency.

Matthew Lowry (2015): An FBI agent in Washington, D.C., was charged with obstructing justice and falsifying records after he allegedly stole heroin from evidence, ingested it, and replaced the missing volume with a cutting agent before returning the evidence bags to the vault.

The FBI Crime Lab Scandal (1990s): Following reports by whistleblower Dr. Frederic Whitehurst, an extensive Department of Justice Inspector General investigation revealed systemic misconduct inside the elite FBI Crime Lab. The findings highlighted cases of scientists and agents altering reports, selectively presenting evidence, and providing scientifically invalid, pro-prosecution testimony in major criminal trials.

Frederic Whitehurst's reports to agency officials ultimately forced the bureau to overhaul its lab practices and launch widespread reviews of historical forensic testimony.

Links:

https://whistleblowersblog.org/government-whistleblowers/intelligence-community-whistleblowers/dr-whitehurst-and-the-fbi-lab-scandal/

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-32380051

Shall we talk about the conduct of some FBI agents and the FBI lab in the JFK case? Let's see: destruction of evidence, contradictory lab reports, producing witness interview reports that misrepresented what the witnesses said, etc. etc. I just have to wonder what you have read on the JFK case to not know these things. 

Ditto for some police departments, especially the Dallas and Los Angeles police departments. Do you have any idea how many times the Dallas police and the LA police have been caught planting evidence, suppressing evidence, giving false statements, etc.?

Heard of the Ramparts Scandal involving the LA police where some officers and detectives were found to have planted evidence and given false statements? The city of LA had to pay a massive settlement to settle all the lawsuits that came when these cases were exposed.

Some links for your education:

https://journals.library.wustl.edu/lawreview/article/4627/galley/21460/view/

https://peabodyawards.com/award-profile/fake-drugs-real-lives/

https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/news/2006/mar/15/dallas-fake-drug-cases-settle-for-millions-jury-awards-damages/

https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1208&context=fac_pm

"Dallas Police Officer Accused of Planting Evidence Turns Himself In"

"Crooked Cop Caught Red Handed Planting Evidence"

https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr129/BILLS-117hr129ih.htm
EXCERPT: In what became known nationally as the ``Sheetrock'' scandal, Dallas police officers and undercover informants were found to have set up dozens of innocent people, mostly Mexican immigrants, by planting fake drugs on them consisting of chalk-like material used in sheetrock and other        brands of wallboard. The revelations led to the dismissal of over 40 cases (although some of those arrested were already deported). In April 2005, a former Dallas narcotics detective was sentenced to five years in prison for his role in the scheme. Charges against others are pending.

https://pelleylaw.com/blog/2017/08/cops-planting-drugs-it-doesnt-just-happen-in-the-movies/

https://www.justice.gov/archive/opa/pr/2004/January/04_crt_041.htm

https://markshawbooks.com/assets/docs/New-Evidence-Proving-Warren-Commission-Corruption_Oct-26-2023-1.pdf

FBI Crime Lab scandal and Other Cases of Evidence Tampering/fabrication:

https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/first/k/kelly-evidence.html?scp=8&sq=Ultraviolet&st=Search

https://oig.justice.gov/sites/default/files/archive/special/9704a/index.htm (even this quasi-whitewash of the crime lab scandal by the DOJ IG contains a great deal of damning evidence of misconduct and incompetence by FBI crime lab experts)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1998/08/06/minimal-punishment-meted-in-fbi-lab-flap/074b8ecc-8190-4983-a112-86504ff21be4/

https://makejusticeblind.com/a-roundup-of-the-key-facts-of-the-tampering/ (discusses a case where photos were altered by the FBI to help convict someone--gee, sound familiar?)

https://www.forensicscolleges.com/blog/resources/real-cases-of-forensic-fraud-flawed-evidence

Secret Service Misconduct in JFK Case and Other Cases:

We now know that HSCA staff counsel Belford Lawson, who conducted the Committee’s investigation of the Secret Service, suspected that a Secret Service agent planted CE 399 at Parkland Hospital. In a memo on the interview with Nathan Pool, who had seen a bullet on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital, Lawson noted that a Secret Service agent was close enough to the area where the bullet was found to have planted the bullet, and that following up on Pool’s testimony could have led to identifying the agent:

A Secret Service agent was for a significant period of time close enough to the elevator to plant a bullet; may lead to an identification of that agent; and will reveal the superficiality of the Warren Commission’s approach. (“Untaped Interview of January 10, 1977, with Nathan Pool,” HSCA memorandum from Belford Lawson to Robert Tanenbaum, January 12, 1977, record number 180-10089-10189, available at
https://ia801206.us.archive.org/31/items/nsia-PoolNathan/nsia-PoolNathan/Pool%20Nathan%2001.pdf)

Dr. Donald Wilkes, "The Secret Service and the JFK Assassination"
https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1174&context=fac_pm

https://www.amazon.com/Survivors-Guilt-Service-Failure-President/dp/1937584607

https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/slideshows/prostitutes-grenades-and-drunk-driving-20-years-of-secret-service-scandals

https://time.com/3449641/secret-service-scandal/

A good introduction to the subject of the dubious evidence cited against Oswald is Donald Wilkes' article "Lee Harvey Oswald, the Patsy: An Objective Review of the Evidence Concludes That Oswald Was Framed," published by the University of Georgia in 2013 on the University of Georgia Digital Commons: Popular Media website. At the time, Wilkes was an emeritus professor of law at the University of Georgia. Here's a link to his article:

https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?httpsredir=1&article=1184&context=fac_pm

The case of Randall Adams. The award-winning 1988 Errol Morris documentary The Thin Blue Line documents the now-infamous case of Randall Adams, who was framed and railroaded by the DPD and the Dallas District Attorney's (DA's) office in 1976 on the false charge of killing a police officer named Robert Wood.

The film documents that the DPD used false witnesses, suppressed exculpatory evidence, discarded the most likely suspect (who later confessed), and refused to let Adams talk to a lawyer for two weeks. Gee, sound familiar? The DA was Henry Wade. The DPD officer who engineered the frame-up was Gus Rose. Humm, do those names sound familiar?

The Texas Criminal Court of Appeals overturned Adams' conviction in 1989 on the grounds of prosecutorial malfeasance (misconduct) and inconsistencies in the evidence. It had become clear that Adams had nothing whatsoever to do with Officer Wood's murder.

Yet, even after the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals voided Adams' conviction, DA Wade vowed to retry Adams, saying there was no room in his book "for a cop-killer getting off with anything else than the death penalty"! Mind you, this was after the state's criminal appeals court had found the DA's office guilty of misconduct! This says volumes about Wade's ethics and integrity.

Because of public pressure created by the release of The Thin Blue Line and pressure from state government officials, the Dallas DA's office eventually decided against retrying Adams.

Here's the transcript of The Thin Blue Line:

https://www.errolmorris.com/film/tbl_transcript.html

Here are links with more information on the DPD's sleazy record, running clear into the 2020s:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dallas_Police_Department#:~:text=in%20July%202008.-,Fake%20drug%20scandal,were%20actually%20not%20illegal%20substances.

https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/fourth-former-dallas-officer-in-fake-drug-scandal-gets-one-year-probation/287-338790876

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Dallas-police-hammered-for-fake-drug-scandal-1486478.php

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/6-dallas-police-officers-on-leave-linked-to-illegal-search/2748127/

Here are links with information on cases of other police departments planting and fabricating evidence:

https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6013&context=law_lawreview

https://www.themarshallproject.org/records/4692-cops-planting-evidence

https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?params=/context/faculty_scholarship/article/1903/&path_info=S_Fisher_Just_the_Facts.pdf

https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/police-corruption-revealed-los-angeless-rampart-division
Discusses the LAPD's Rampart scandal, where the LAPD was caught planting and fabricating evidence in the 1990s. The city of LA eventually was forced to pay millions to settle the civil lawsuit brought by some of the victims.

https://jmarshlaw.com/chicago-police-planted-evidence/
Discusses three cases where the Chicago Police Department was caught planting evidence from the 1980s to the mid-2000s.

https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/249850.pdf

Just so no one gets the wrong impression, I am not saying that federal agents or local police officers frequently fabricate, alter, or suppress evidence. These are not things that happen all the time or very frequently, but they have happened, and they will likely continue to happen on an occasional basis.

As some here know, I am very pro-law enforcement. I strongly oppose the leftist push to defund local police forces. Also, in my many years in the intelligence community, I worked with a number of FBI agents and found the vast majority of them to be honorable and trustworthy.

I am confident that most of the federal agents and military officers who altered evidence, suppressed evidence, misrepresented witness accounts, etc., in JFK case were ordered to do so and were led to believe they were acting in the interest of national security. 

Harold Rydberg, the person who drew the diagrams of JFK's wounds that were published in the Warren Commission's (WC's) report, was the director of the Medical Illustration School at Bethesda Naval Hospital at the time. He knew Dr. James Humes and Dr. J. Thornton Boswell, two of the autopsy doctors, quite well. In fact, Humes and Boswell attended Rydberg's wedding.

When interviewed in 2003 by William Matson Law, Rydberg said he believed that the autopsy doctors were ordered to misrepresent JFK's wounds and to suppress evidence of any frontal shots to JFK. (William Matson Law, In The Eye Of History; Disclosures in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence, 2004, pp. 152-153, 420-428).

I find it interesting that Rydberg held the same view of Humes that I formed a few years ago: that Humes tried to leave clues to indicate there was more information about JFK's wounds than was described in the autopsy report.

Rydberg also said the following:

-- That the "stare of death" autopsy photo does not show the damage that was visible on JFK's face during the autopsy.

-- That there are many autopsy photos missing from the official collection.

-- That he doubted that the autopsy photos in evidence are the authentic autopsy photos.

-- That he and other hospital personnel involved with the autopsy or JFK medical evidence in any way were placed under strict gag orders. 

No.11 reason: the 24” bag (give or take a couple of inches) as Buell W. Frazier described the way he saw Oswald  carrying the bag under  his armpit and in the  cupped palm of his hand.

No.12 reason: per BW Frazier, Oswald was wearing the GRAY jacket that Friday morning. Oswald had only 2 jackets, a gray jacket and a blue jacket. Oswald left TSBD wearing no jacket according to John Corbett because he believes Bledsoe saw Oswald on McWatters bus wearing  only the brown shirt with a hole in the sleeve. Ok, if that is true then how does Oswald’s gray jacket which he must have left in the TSBD get to under a car in a parking lot to be pointed out by some unnamed person? Oswald leaving the boarding house zipping up a jacket (per Earlene Roberts), could therefore only be the BLUE jacket. The description of the Tippit shooters “tan” jacket does not fit the  BLUE jacket Oswald had on when he left the boarding house. If Oswald discarded this blue jacket before he was seen by Brewer, how does that BLUE jacket wind up being found in the TSBD in the Domino room? And Who found BLUE jacket anyway?

In October of 1964, Frazier acknowledged that the rifle was in the bag when he signed a notarized affidavit stating that his car is the car which transported the weapon that morning.