Jump to content
The Education Forum
Mike Rago

How did Zapruder know of Single Bullet Theory at time of testimony?

Recommended Posts

David,

That is an intriguing article on RFK's alleged statements (in such uncharacteristic detail) endorsing the Warren Report. The fact he spoke in Poland makes me all the more suspicious. I didn't know that RFK, or any other Kennedy family member, had publicly even uttered the word "Oswald," let alone gave such an intricate breakdown of his character and background. I sense that you are skeptical of Talbot's thesis regarding RFK's doubts about the official story. I am skeptical of this speech in Poland.

I wouldn't call Jackie's testimony an endorsement, however tepid, of the single bullet theory. In fact, her telling line, "I used to think there were three" shots, indicate how thoroughly indoctrinated she'd become, like most of America, to the official line by that point.

Thanks for a fascinating, thought provoking post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the the photographic evidence is very clear what happened here and it is supported by almost all of the witness testimony. The first bullet passed through the presidents neck and struck, grazed or startled Connally on his left side. As Connally turned back to his right he was struck by a second bullet which missed the president completely.

The photographic evidence is an extremely high hurdle to overcome....

Why does anyone even respond to this person? It's clear from this post that he's a lone nutter. Whatever his true name may be.

Dawn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is absolutely nothing in that post that indicates I am a lone nutter. By the way, the correct term is Lone Gunman. Jack Ruby was the Lone Nut.

Edited by Mike Rago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there are some people who have been talking out their bum, and resort to attacking members when they lose arguments( as you have done repeatedly )

lonenut.png

Edited by Mike Rago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am helping you to become more educated concerning this case Lee. whether you like or not, which apparently you do not.

Apparently, you did not even know that Jack Ruby was the "Lone Nut".

I started this thread. And it was a good thread until the people who like to attack other members got involved. If there is anyone who likes to leave their skid marks on threads I would say it is you.

I am not a member of the "good ol boy" network of the JFK assassination. Never have been and never will be. I will support you if you have a position that is supported by the photographic record.

Edited by Mike Rago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lee , you are breaking forum rules right and left. You are not allowed to say those things to people.

This was a good thread until you and dawn started attacking.

If you do not like my opinions don't read them.

Edited by Mike Rago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lee , you are breaking forum rules right and left. You are not allowed to say those things to people.

This was a good thread until you and dawn started attacking.

If you do not like my opinions don't read them.

Just like Bill Kelly's thread before you started wiping your backside over it you mean?Why don't you just admit that you have a penchant for making up aliases. We all know it. You think if you just ignore it we'll all forget about it and let you carry on with your nonsense?What was the name of the photographic interpretation skill that you, and you alone, were born with again?

To me this is not a mutual support group. I am not going to support something that I do not agree with.

I read his theory and I thoroughly disagree with it. He blames me for his own hastiness. He thinks the same people who conspired to kill Hitler conspired to kill Kennedy. It is stupid, but opportunistic. Solving the case is not about connecting dots.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=13865&st=120#entry259254

And when it comes to wiping backsides I would say you are much more experienced at that than I am. If you could argue you would not have to use your backside so often.

Edited by Mike Rago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read many articles by Bill Kelly. This was not the first one.

If you want defend his article go right ahead and defend it and we will debate in that thread. But you will not do that. Again, if you could argue your points you would not have to resort to your backside so often.

Here is the link to that thread. If you want to support your statements lets do it...

http://educationforu...65

Lee, you have never debated me. You have exclusively resorted to attacking the messenger and not the message. That is your mo. You started it when I pressed you on the CE399 issue.

Edited by Mike Rago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is absolutely nothing in that post that indicates I am a lone nutter. By the way, the correct term is Lone Gunman. Jack Ruby was the Lone Nut.

I am helping you to become more educated concerning this case Lee. whether you like or not, which apparently you do not.

Apparently, you did not even know that Jack Ruby was the "Lone Nut".

That History Matters capture did not state that Ruby was the Lone Nut. It stated that Ruby was "a lone nut." As was Lee Harvey Oswald.

And whoever wrote it obviously did so tongue in cheek. Mike Rago just didn't read it very carefully.

Bill Kelly is one of the most tolerant members of this Forum when it comes to opinions that differ from his. When he complains, there's probably something to it.

http://educationforu...300#entry259274

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lee Harvey Oswald was the Lone Gunman. That is how it started. Jack Ruby was the Lone Nut. That is how it started.

The Lone Gunman was killed by the Lone Nut. The key word is "Lone".

Bill Kelly is not unlike Lee. Bill knows that I am going to challenge him on certain things that he does not want to be challenged on. So Bill resorts to attacking the messenger and not the message.

I will say this about Mr. Lifton. He does not avoid the issues. He does not attack the messenger he attacks the message, quite brilliantly in some instances. Some of the others should take a lesson from him.

Edited by Mike Rago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lee Harvey Oswald was the Lone Gunman. That is how it started. Jack Ruby was the Lone Nut. That is how it started.

The Lone Gunman was killed by the Lone Nut. The key word is "Lone".

You need to go back and read the screen capture you posted. Carefully. Take note of the word "similarly."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not want to quibble over this issue, it is not that important, but the "similarly" applies to the words "alone" and "lone", in my opinion.

Edited by Mike Rago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The debate on CE399 is not done. There may be a lot of debate but it is not done.

This is what Bill Kelly wrote...

countercoupbs.png

That is not a fact, he is stating his opinion.

And yes, lets take note that you prefer to resort to name calling than actually supporting any statements you make.

Edited by Mike Rago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no quibbling to it. It's there in black and white. Can't help people that can't read.

I promised myself I wouldn't waste more than ten minutes on Mike Rago. I've reached my allotment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is ambiguous at best. And you do quibble. I watched you quibble with Jim DiEungenio for a whole month, over completely irrelevant things.

There should be a 10 minute rule for everyone when it comes to quibbling.

Here is the quote...

The Report found that Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy, alone and unaided, and that similarly Oswald's killer Jack Ruby was a "lone nut."

In doing a search of the forum I ran across this thread and quote from Anthony Summers

The Kennedy assassination is a special case, I think. At first, to its shame, the U.S. media simply trusted the establishment and did virtually nothing to probe into the case. Lazy from the outset, and later gullible and passive. Frankly, they've not done much even since the evidence for "lone gunman Oswald" became evidently fragile. Why? So ridiculous were many of the early "critics", so bizarre was the Garrison circus in New Orleans, that many perfectly honourable reporters shied away from what looked like a quagmire for reputations. So did I - until asked to make a BBC documentary about the work of the House Assassinations Committee.

I note that he used the phrase "lone gunman" in reference to Oswald, which was the original way the press referred to him and still do refer to him that way. The press refers to Ruby as the "lone nut".

http://educationforu...137

Edited by Mike Rago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×