Alterationists vs Non-Alternationists?

[Mike Rago]

What you are addressin

Autopsy Report:

The other missile 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.

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. As far as can be ascertained this missile struck no bony

structures in its path through the body.

----

Their diagram of this is:

Note the necessity for them to tilt JFK's head forward in order to allow a bullet from BEHIND to

enter where it entered in his back AND then to exit his throat. Remember, this bullet caused NO

broken bones and didn't appear to get deflected by any bone. So, his head must be forward in

order to accommodate their explanation. However, from such an angle of trajectory how is it

remotely possible for said bullet to then wound Governor Connally since Connally was not lying

on the floor at JFK's feet when he was shot?

What you are questioning is the second component of the SBT, where did the bullet go after

it exited the presidents neck. If there is an error in the SBT this is where it is at. Where did the bullet go after it exited the neck?

I have a hypothesis on that.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Mike Rago

[Greg Burnham]

What you are addressin...

What you are questioning is the second component of the SBT, where did the bullet go after

it exited the presidents neck. If there is an error in the SBT this is where it is at. Where did the bullet go after it exited the neck?

I have a hypothesis on that.

According to the SBT of which you subscribe, it went into the Governor's back, shattered 2 ribs and exited just under his right nipple.

If you have an hypothesis that differs from that then you do not subscribe to the SBT. So, which is it? Do you believe

the SBT is true or do you believe it is a lie?

[Mike Rago]

I explain what I believe in this post.

http://educationforu...=90#entry257981

Greg, you can be part of the problem or you can be part of the solution. What is it going to be?

Edited August 9, 2012 by Mike Rago

[Greg Burnham]

It is at this point in a thread that I become dismayed by the fact that the individual appears to not be sincerely seeking to discuss this matter.

I only hope that novices who are perhaps reading this information for the first time will benefit from the exchange.

I'm out before I am tempted to violate forum rules.

[Mike Rago]

I have been discussing the case.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Mike Rago

[Dawn Meredith]

I explain what I believe in this post.

http://educationforu...=90#entry257981

Greg, you can be part of the problem or you can be part of the solution. What is it going to be?

Greg has been part of the solution for a very long time.

I have no further comment on your posts or I will get in trouble.

Dawm

[David Josephs]

Yo Mike... this really too hard for you to follow?

The hypethetical that Specter introduces describes the SBT to a "T"... 45 degree downward entrance (ala Humes and the FBI report)

Jones tells you to produce a hole like what we see, the bullet would have simply dropped out the front of the neck...

Using the image I posted... wanna show us the SBT in action? or you gonna stick tail tween legs and shuffle off?

??

Personally, I do NOT subscribe to the ice bullet, flechette theory... when we have a perfectly 2or more perfectly logical explanations

1) What we see on the medical evidence is complete BS and not indicatvie of the injuries sustained.... there is evidence of another shot entering at the base of his neck per Lipsey, and I believe by Kellerman yet Specter botched the question so bad we are not sure...

If the Lipsey entrance was there, a fragment could have exited the throat

Mr. Rankin:

Then there‘s a great range of material in regards to the wound and the autopsy and this point of exit or entrance of the bullet in the front of the neck, and that all has to be developed much more than we have at the present time.

We have an explanation there in the autopsy that probably a fragment came out the front of the neck, but with the elevation

the shot must have come from, and the angle, it seems quite apparent,

since we have the picture of where the bullet entered in the back, that the bullet entered below the shoulder blade to the

right of the backbone, which is below the place where the

picture shows the bullet came out in the neckband of the shirt

in front, and the bullet, according to the autopsy didn't strike

any bone at all, that particular bullet, and go through.

So that how it could turn, and --

Rep. Boggs. I thought I read that bullet just went.in a

finger's length.

Mr. Rankin. That is what they first said

2) While the hole in the windshield is still, imo, not a settled issue... I guess it takes reall hangers to shoot thru a windshield between 4 people in a moving vehicle..

Unless maybe the limo stopped... but that's not when we see the reaction to the throat...

Shooting him to paralyze him, to me, makes no sense.... you run the risk of anyone, someone, coming to his aid... all Jackie needed to do was pull him down...

Greer and the other SS agents, save Hill, appear frozen and doing anything BUT protecting JFK....

As others have put so well... JFK leaving Dallas alive was not acceptable... Dick Russell discusses conversations with men who say they too were ready to shoot JFK along the freeway route should he get out of DP alive (but that's another story for another thread)....

I am NOT discounting your good work or your conclusions, just respectfully disagreeing at this point as the evidence used to reverse engineer the assassination is akin to being given an automobile and told to reverse engineer an elephant... the extant physical evidence CANNOT lead to an understanding of the assassination's physical realities....

As I've repeatedly held, the witnesses and non-government investigations, along with what was NOT edited out of the WCR testimonies will give you a much clearer picture of what occurred than ANY of the physical evidence... The physical evidence is a roadmap to the conspiracy...

One only need follow it.

DJ

If what you say is true, nobody, would be arguing the SBT.

You're sadly mistaken. During the autopsy Humes probed the wound with his finger and found it shallow. Finck probed the wound properly with a metal probe and declared there was no lane of transit.

And yet people still argue for the SBT!

Let me ask you a question. I asked Mr. Joesphs this question but he never answered it.

Do you think that people altered Zapruder frame 313 to show ejected bone from the head in order to conceal surgery to the presidents head that happened between Parkland and Bethesda?

Lets pretend .....

Lets pretend that you are in car and someone is going to shoot at you in the car. And you are in the back seat. You know that someone is going to aim at you from behind with a high powered rifle.. Would you let your child sit in the front seat immediately in front of you? And the car is a covertible with top down. Lets assume that you know you are going to be hit in the back and there is only going to be one shot.

If your answer is no , why is it no?

Answer to your question about 313... No.

Mike... your "let's pretend" arguments remind me of Arlen Specter's

Mr. SPECTER - Permit me to supply some additional facts, Dr. Perry, which I shall ask you to assume as being true for purposes of having you express an opinion.

Assume

first of all that the President was struck by a 6.5 mm. copper-jacketed bullet fired from a gun having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second,

with the weapon being approximately 160 to 250 feet from the President,

with the bullet striking him at an angle of declination of approximately 45 degrees,

striking the President on the upper right posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula,

being 14 cm. from the tip of the right acromion process and 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process,

passing through the President's body striking no bones,

traversing the neck and sliding between the large muscles in the posterior portion of the President's body through a fascia channel without violating the pleural cavity but bruising the apex of the right pleural cavity,

and bruising the most apical portion of the right lung inflicting a hematoma to the right side of the larynx, which you have just described,

and striking the trachea causing the injury which you described, and then exiting from the hole that you have described in the midline of the neck.

Now, assuming those facts to be true, would the hole which you observed in the neck of the President be consistent with an exit wound under those circumstances?

Just like you Mike... "Let's PRETEND"

So our Mr Specter here is asking whether - IF YOU ASSUME THAT THE WOUND I AM DESCRIBING IS A WOUND OF EXIT,

Would the hole be consistent with an EXIT wound?

Is an EXIT WOUND (as Arlen described it and asks that you ASSUME it to be true), an EXIT WOUND?

Dr. JONES - The hole was very small and relatively clean cut, as you would see in a bullet that is entering rather than exiting from a patient. If this were an exit wound, you would think that it exited at a very low velocity to produce no more damage than this had done, and if this were a missile of high velocity, you would expect more of an explosive type of exit wound, with more tissue destruction than this appeared to have on superficial examination.

Mr. SPECTER - Would it be consistent, then, with an exit wound, but of low velocity, as you put it?

Dr. JONES - Yes; of very low velocity to the point that you might think that this bullet barely made it through the soft tissues and just enough to drop out of the skin on the opposite side.

So what up here Mike?

If the bullet was barely going fast enough to exit the front... how did it do all those things to JC? IT DIDN'T.

Finally, if we assume Arlen's LET's PRETEND is fact... where is the EXIT POINT of a shot that HITS NOTHING, and ENTERS JFK's BACK wherever you want it to.... and travels downward at 45 degrees?

(Hint: the bullet would have been shot from the moon, down thru JFK;s head, out his throat and basically down into the floor in front of JFK) But how about YOU do something other than offer your opinion....

Show us how a 45 degree shot does what you say it did....

[Mike Rago]

I explain what I believe in this post.

http://educationforu...=90#entry257981

Greg, you can be part of the problem or you can be part of the solution. What is it going to be?

Greg has been part of the solution for a very long time.

I have no further comment on your posts or I will get in trouble.

Dawm

You have a whole thread over at your forum that Greg started a few days ago.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Mike Rago

[Dawn Meredith]

I explain what I believe in this post.

http://educationforu...=90#entry257981

Greg, you can be part of the problem or you can be part of the solution. What is it going to be?

Greg has been part of the solution for a very long time.

I have no further comment on your posts or I will get in trouble.

Dawm

You have a whole thread over at your forum that Greg started a few days ago.

Ya I can say what I want over there. I was talking about here. And I had not been following your posts as I actually do work for a living.

Dawn

[Mike Rago]

I explain what I believe in this post.

http://educationforu...=90#entry257981

Greg, you can be part of the problem or you can be part of the solution. What is it going to be?

Greg has been part of the solution for a very long time.

I have no further comment on your posts or I will get in trouble.

Dawm

You have a whole thread over at your forum that Greg started a few days ago.

Ya I can say what I want over there. I was talking about here. And I had not been following your posts as I actually do work for a living.

Dawn

You need to watch watch you say over there because you really cannot say anything you want.

Edited August 9, 2012 by Mike Rago

[Cliff Varnell]

You cannot answer that question Cliff.

What question?

You ignore the evidence I've laid out then you say I haven't answered a question.

More work of an "honest" broker?

If you were in court and the opposing attorney asked you that simple question and you responded that they were "ice" bullets and simply disappeared, you would lose. Its a losing argument.

It isn't me who said "ice bullet" -- it was the autopsists the night of the autopsy. That's what *they" thought.

They took the issue seriously. That you do not speaks so much more about you.

[Cliff Varnell]

Shooting him to paralyze him, to me, makes no sense.... you run the risk of anyone, someone, coming to his aid... all Jackie needed to do was pull him down...

If she didn't know what was wrong with him -- why would she pull him down?

In a first-shot/kill-shot scenario the danger was that he'd only be winged, and like a good military man hit the deck. They could not assume a successful first-shot/kill-shot.

Could they?

There's a bigger point being lost here. This idea of a blood soluble strike came from the autopsists.

[Daniel Gallup]

What you are addressin

Autopsy Report:

The other missile 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.

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. As far as can be ascertained this missile struck no bony

structures in its path through the body.

----

Their diagram of this is:

Note the necessity for them to tilt JFK's head forward in order to allow a bullet from BEHIND to

enter where it entered in his back AND then to exit his throat. Remember, this bullet caused NO

broken bones and didn't appear to get deflected by any bone. So, his head must be forward in

order to accommodate their explanation. However, from such an angle of trajectory how is it

remotely possible for said bullet to then wound Governor Connally since Connally was not lying

on the floor at JFK's feet when he was shot?

What you are questioning is the second component of the SBT, where did the bullet go after

it exited the presidents neck. If there is an error in the SBT this is where it is at. Where did the bullet go after it exited the neck?

I have a hypothesis on that.

I'm sorry Mike, but the error in the SBT starts before it "exited the neck," because all the medical personnel who saw the wound said it had the appearance of an entrance wound, and as i posted pages ago, Dr. Perry told Dr. Clark that bullet entered the neck from the front, ranged downward, and did not exit. That's the problem with you SBT, pure and simple.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Mike,

What is there that you do not understand about the evidence?

(1) holes in the shirt and jacked are about 5.5" below the collar;

(2) they align with the wound location on the Boswell diagram;

(3) they correspond with Berkley's death certificate location;

(4) reenactment photographs show a patch for the wound there;

(5) "bunching" cannot account for the convergence of evidence;

(6) the mortician's report confirmed the wound at that location;

(7) Gerald Ford had had the location of the wound redescribed;

(8) Mantik did a CAT scan and proved it was not even possible;

(9) Perry described the throat wound as an entrance three times;

(10) the bullet went through the windshield en route to the target;

(11) there are small shrapnel wounds in his face that leaked fluid;

(12) they were caused by small pieces of glass from the windshield;

(13) Bob Livingston explained what happened to the bullet, namely:

(a) cerebellar as well as cerebellar tissue extruded from the wound;

( that could not have happened unless the tentorium had ruptured;

© the shots to the EOP and right/temple would not have done that;

(d) the bullet that hit his neck must have fragmented and caused it;

(e) where part went down into his right lung and the other upward;

(f) the fragment that went upward has to have severed the tentorium;

(g) otherwise, cerebellum could not have extruded from the wound.

(14) I explained most, if not all this, in "Reasoning about Assassinations".

(15) It was presented at Cambridge during an international conference.

(16) Then it was published in an international and peer-reviewed journal.

(17) If we know anything about the case, we know the SBT is not true.

(18) Throat wound and to Connally require separate shots and shooters.

(19) So we know there must have been a conspiracy in the death of JFK.

(20) It follows directly from establishing where JFK was hit in the back.

Why are you ignoring the evidence, which is abundant and compelling?

Jim

P.S. Jack could not duck down because he was wearing a back brace.

Between the limo stop and his back brace, he was an easy target to kill.

[David Josephs]

Shooting him to paralyze him, to me, makes no sense.... you run the risk of anyone, someone, coming to his aid... all Jackie needed to do was pull him down...

If she didn't know what was wrong with him -- why would she pull him down?

In a first-shot/kill-shot scenario the danger was that he'd only be winged, and like a good military man hit the deck. They could not assume a successful first-shot/kill-shot.

Could they?

There's a bigger point being lost here. This idea of a blood soluble strike came from the autopsists.

That's not what I said Cliff.... I said that was all Jackie needed to do....

You don't think the soluble round shot could not have "nicked" or "winged" him and there would be NO CHANCE for a kill shot....

The FIRST SHOT, the unexpected shot, is the best chance for a kill shot... even a perfect paralyzing shot leaves room for some heroic action by someone around JFK...

With no one infront of them, Greer's job was to get the heck out of there, Kellerman's SHOULD have gone thru hell and high water to cover his president...

If anything, the stopping of the limo should have caused a few SS men to jump on JFK to protect him...

Bolden tells us that probably wouldn't have happened in any scenario....

The autopsists were GUESSING cliff... they did not see a round in the body... so, not realizing that the body had altered, or actually taking part in the alterations themselves

and that the bullets that SHOULD have been there, were no longer there

and the FBI/SS would NEVER TAMPER WITH THIS IMPORTANT EVIDENCE, right?

these "autopsists" were guessing as to what happened, and a soluble bullet made more sense at the time ... then what really happened - Humes/Boswell altered the wounds

IMO Humes was trying to leave clues to clear his conscience...

Amazing how "soluble bullet" makes more sense to you then the Secret Service disappearing evidence which it had in its hot little hands....

thanks to Palamara:

The Secret Service was responsible for so much in this case, far more than most people know or suspect. To recap:

1) PROTECTION OF JFK;

2) PLANNING OF TEXAS TRIP;

3) INSIDE KNOWLEDGE OF JFK’S PERSONAL LIFE, NA-TIONAL SECURITY ISSUES;

4) PRESIDENTIAL LIMOUSINE (INCLUDING WINDSHIELD);

5) JFK’S BODY AFTER DEATH---PRESENCE AT PARKLAND AND BETHESDA (AUTOPSY);

6) AIR FORCE 1 AND AIR FORCE 2;

7) C-130 TRANSPORT PLANE;

8) AUTOPSY X-RAYS/ PHOTOS;

9) AUTOPSY REPORTS;

10) JFK’S CLOTHING;

11) THREE PIECES OF SKULL;

12) CE399/ "MAGIC BULLET";

13) RECORDINGS OF DALLAS POLICE RADIO;

14) PRIME ASSASSINATION WITNESSES;

15) INTERVIEWS OF TSBD WITNESSES;

16) INTERVIEWS OF PARKLAND DOCTORS;

17) TV, RADIO RECORDINGS OF PARKLAND DOCTORS;

18) CAPTIVITY OF AND INTERVIEWS WITH MARINA OSWALD, INCLUDING TRANSLATION;

19) FIRST REENACTMENTS & SURVEYS: 11/25,11/27, AND 12/5/63;

20) ASSASSINATION PHOTOS & FILMS.