Jump to content
The Education Forum

Mike Rago

One Post per Day
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

4,511 profile views

Mike Rago's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)

  1. This is the post that started this thread on its hijacked course. Mr. DiEugenio went out of his way to attack 3 other members with false assertions. Does he really think that all of DVP's ideas lack any credible evidence? Of course not, there is credible evidence to suspect Oswald. There is also credible evidence to suspect a gunman on the knoll who used a handgun(not a rifle) and credible evidence to suspect Zapruder. When a member makes a post in a thread, and in that post he attacks other members, then those other members are going to respond.
  2. We need the photograph to show us both the orientation of JFK's body and his jacket at the time he was shot. Without the photograph all we have is a jacket with a hole in it.
  3. I didn't ask you if there was a contradiction, I asked you which carried more weight, the physical evidence or the photographic evidence? The discussion is about how do we "weigh" the evidence. "Weighing" the evidence is not microanalyzing the evidence. It is part of the process of finding the facts.
  4. Agree, physical evidence trumps photographic evidence, sometimes. Why do I say sometimes? Lets pretend we have a bullet hole in a shirt and we also have a video of the shooting. Here is a picture of JFK's jacket hanging on a hanger. It shows the bullet hole in the back. And here is a photograph of the President riding in his car seconds before he was shot in the back. The photo shows the jacket was bunched up in the back. Which carries more weight, the actual jacket with the bullet hole or the picture which shows how the jacket was oriented when the bullet was fired?
  5. Mr. DiEugenio, I think your post violates the rules but I am not sure. Here is the rule that I think you are breaking.... Accusations of Member Credibility:- Members that post and/or imply that a fellow member of this forum is using an alias on this forum or an alias elsewhere designed to deceive members at forum or any other forum, and/or that he/she may be paid to post on this forum:- Also, it is completely off the topic of this thread.
  6. It is not just about evidence. You have to know how to "weigh" the evidence. For instance, photographic evidence should hold more weight than any other type of evidence. Evidence from the scene of the crime should hold more weight as well.
  7. Focus you research on Zapruder. He is and always has been the key to solving this crime. Try to figure out exactly what Zapruder did in the seconds after he got down from the pedestal. Zapruder is the "elephant in the room". Since words matter let me spell it out. The phrase "elephant in the room" is an idiom that we use when talking about a single instance of something that is an obvious, unavoidable truth that people still insist on not talking about. The phrase comes from the idea that having an elephant in your living room is a large obvious problem but it is easier to not talk about or confront it because its a problem that cannot be solved without some difficulty. idiom - a group of words established by usage as having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words.
  8. There is only one shooter in the Moorman photo but it is not the figure on the extreme left. All of the evidence we have tells us that no shot was fired from that location. Two of the acoustic experts claimed that a shot came from that location but the photographic evidence does not support that acoustic conclusion. What evidence you ask? For starters, the Moorman photo. The Moorman photo was taken about 400 milliseconds after the supposed shot was fired from that locaiton (according to the acoustic evidence). 400 milliseconds is about the time it takes to blink your eye. In the Moorman photo there is absolutely no visual confirmation that a shot was fired from there 400 milliseconds earlier. Below is a copy of the Moorman photo. I have a lot more to say about that but I will wait until a different thread. For now, look to the left behind the fence where the shooter is supposed to be located? According to the theory his shot(from a rifle) was fired just 400 milliseconds earlier) Do you see any evidence of a gunshot? No. As I said, I do think there is a shooter in this photo but it is not the man on the left. The white arrow in the Moorman photo indicates where I think the shooter was located. At first glance, you might think that is the "classic" badgeman location, but it is not. I believe that the shooter was located in front of the fence, not behind it. That is a huge difference and I will get into that later. The Moorman photo is not the best photograph to see the knoll shooter. That is the problem with using the Moorman photo to identify the shooter on the knoll. Also, I believe that the Moorman photo shows the same figure at the retaining wall that we see in the Betzner photo. The inset in the Moorman photo below show the "black dog" figure from the Betzner photo. The red line connects the inset figure with the same figure in the same spot at the retaining wall in the Moorman photo. "Badgeman" is a myth of sorts. There was a shooter on the knoll and he was located close to where Gary Mack said he was located. But the actual shooter was in front of the fence not behind it and he was not wearing a badge or a hat and he did not use a rifle. The best image in which to analyze the knoll shooter is the Betzner photo, not the Moorman photo.
  9. Correcting some information from the previous post which left the impression that the bullet could not have passed through the neck because of all the soft tissue in the way. The key here is , "soft tissue". I am including strap muscle in my definition of "soft tissue" and I do not know if that is correct but it is not bone. 1 The Bethesda autopsy physicians attempted to probe the bullet hole in the base of Kennedy's neck above the scapula, but were unsuccessful as it passed through neck strap muscle. They did not perform a full dissection or persist in tracking, as throughout the autopsy, they were unaware of the exit wound, at the front of the throat. Emergency room physicians had obscured it when they performed the tracheotomy. At Bethesda, the autopsy report of the president, Warren Exhibit CE 387[9] described the back wound as being oval, 6 x 4 mm, and located "above the upper border of the scapula" [shoulder blade] at a location 14 cm (5.5 in) from the tip of the right acromion process, and 14 cm (5.5 in) below the right mastoid process (the bony prominence behind the ear). The concluding page of the Bethesda autopsy report,[9] states: "The other missile [the bullet to the back] entered the right superior posterior thorax above the scapula, and traversed the soft tissues of the supra-scapular and the supra-clavicular portions of the base of the right side of the neck. The report also reported contusion (bruise) of the apex (top tip) of the right lung in the region where it rises above the clavicle, and noted that although the apex of the right lung and the parietal pleural membrane over it had been bruised, they were not penetrated, indicating passage of a missile close to them, but above them. The report noted that the thoracic cavity was not penetrated. This missile produced contusions of the right apical parietal pleura and of the apical portion of the right upper lobe of the lung. The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea, and made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck." The single bullet of the Warren Commission Report places a bullet wound at the sixth cervical vertebra of the vertebral column, which is consistent with 5.5 inches (14 cm) below the ear. The Warren Report itself does not conclude bullet entry at the sixth cervical vertebra, but this conclusion was made in a 1979 report on the Kennedy assassination by the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), which noted a defect in the C6 vertebra in the Bethesda X-rays, which the Bethesda autopsy physicians had missed, and did not note. http://en.wikipedia....Kennedy_autopsy 1James Gordon is the resident expert. I am sure he will chime in if he disagrees with any of the above 2Get out your magnifying glass and look at the neck image from the previous post you will see those long "belts" are the strap muscles. Cliff , where is your evidence that it is at T3?
  10. Barry, In the comments section of your article you point to the article by Michael Schweitzer and state your belief that the CIA killed John Kennedy. Link to Schweitzer article you reference http://www.facebook....563254230367331 Your $25,000 offer is to prove that Oswald killed the president. As I understand it, you are not proposing that you can prove that the CIA killed John Kennedy. You are not proposing that you can prove that the CIA killed Kennedy are you?
  11. I suggest you read the thread. You can do that...can't you? The do a bit of research and educate yourself. Not that interested. I do not think you really know what you are talking about. You are being too protective of your data, indicating something is not quite right.
  12. You cannot even define the axis of the entrance pupil? I would think it would be perpindicular to the entrance pupil.
  • Create New...