Assorted Assassination Arguments

[David Von Pein]

Just for fun.....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/09/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1180.html

[David Von Pein]

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/04/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1118.html

[David Von Pein]

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html

Newest nail added to the CTers' coffin regarding the "Standdown"
nonsense....

In September 2016, I came across another picture of JFK riding in a
motorcade prior to 11/22/63, with this one showing virtually no security
around JFK's car at all. Not a single moving police motorcycle is visible
in the picture. JFK is standing up even! No agents on the bumper.
Spectators standing in high places overlooking the parade route. And, in
addition, the Secret Service follow-up car is not nearly as close to the
bumper of the President's car here as it usually is.

But since President Kennedy wasn't killed in El Paso, Texas, in June of
1963 (which is where and when this photo was taken), no conspiracy
theorist who believes in the "Secret Service Standdown" theory ever brings
up photographs like this one below when it comes to comparing the security
seen here versus the security seen in Dealey Plaza on November 22nd.
(Photo courtesy of Steve Roe via Facebook.) ....

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--wKwtSLExUo/V-BWcN5x2VI/AAAAAAABKj0/iAJ6CJ_dojo2NMfYONzutL-zHY6jUGQLwCLcB/s2000/JFK-Motorcade.jpg

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/20/2016 5:17 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
> Just for fun.....
>
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/09/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1180.html
>

You are personally causing the shortage of straw in the Midwest. Think
of all those poor horses.

#
#
############
#
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
#
############
#
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
#
############
#
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
#
############
#
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
#
############
#
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
#
############
#
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
#
############
#
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
#
############
#
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
#
############
#
# #
# #
# #
# #
#
#
############
#
# #
# #
# #
# #

[David Von Pein]

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/hilarious-defense-of-oswald.html

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/21/2016 12:16 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
>
> Newest nail added to the CTers' coffin regarding the "Standdown"
> nonsense....
>
> In September 2016, I came across another picture of JFK riding in a
> motorcade prior to 11/22/63, with this one showing virtually no security
> around JFK's car at all. Not a single moving police motorcycle is visible
> in the picture. JFK is standing up even! No agents on the bumper.

So what? Anecdotal. It's called selection bias, something you made
famous. You don't point out the reason why those conditions were
different from Dallas.

> Spectators standing in high places overlooking the parade route. And, in
> addition, the Secret Service follow-up car is not nearly as close to the
> bumper of the President's car here as it usually is.
>

Nothing new. Nothing unusual.

> But since President Kennedy wasn't killed in El Paso, Texas, in June of
> 1963 (which is where and when this photo was taken), no conspiracy
> theorist who believes in the "Secret Service Standdown" theory ever brings

You need to identify the ONE conspiracy kook who invented the "Secret
Service Standdown" theory. You never talked to him. I did. I told him at
the time that it was STUPID. McAdams allows me to use that word here today
because Vince Palamara never posts here any more.

> up photographs like this one below when it comes to comparing the security
> seen here versus the security seen in Dealey Plaza on November 22nd.
> (Photo courtesy of Steve Roe via Facebook.) ....
>

And I can show you the photos of men standing on the new running boards
built under the frame of the limo. So what? They instantly realized it was
a stupid idea (doesn't post here) so it was never used. I can also show
you foreign trips with SS agents riding on the back bumper. I can also
show you JFK ordering agents off the limo. I can also show you photos of
Hosty riding on the back bumper in Dallas, violating that order.

You keep comparing apples to oranges, but you are a lemon.

> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--wKwtSLExUo/V-BWcN5x2VI/AAAAAAABKj0/iAJ6CJ_dojo2NMfYONzutL-zHY6jUGQLwCLcB/s2000/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
>

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/21/2016 11:58 AM, David Von Pein wrote:
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/04/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1118.html

[mainframetech]

Let me correct your most recent error. Here is a list of photos
showing SS agents on the car, alongside the car, or following closely:

https://www.sott.net/image/s7/157885/full/JFk4.jpg
https://www.sott.net/image/s7/157886/full/JFK5.jpg
http://www.sott.net/image/s7/157884/large/JFK3.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/f6/22/5b/f6225b7b1b8c0eeb2282bb3d8867eb68.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qZJHyivWZNY/VQTxiz99hjI/AAAAAAAAPLA/VaGDwda6ziM/s1600/tumblr_njf2n14yYG1sqsv34o1_1280.jpg
http://www.oldcarsweekly.com/wp-content/uploads/13045-06-JFK-Car-01.jpg
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/e0/6b/b1/e06bb1d3fe5aa12897773d58e02ccd55.jpg
https://vincepalamara.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/photo_15796039_135852_34460304_ap.jpg

And that is only a beginning, as I got tired of putting them all down.
These photos are all from a Google search on "jfk vince palamara secret
service limousine" then click on "images".

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/21/2016 10:44 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/hilarious-defense-of-oswald.html

[David Von Pein]

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/08/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-42.html

[Anthony Marsh]

Do you even know what the Union List is? No, you've never been to the
JFK Library. I updated it for them several years ago.

THE WHITE HOUSE PHOTOGRAPH COLLECTION




A UNION LIST




The White House Photograph Collection is comprised of
photographs taken by Robert Knudsen, Office of the Naval Aide
to the President, Abbie Rowe, National Park Service, and
Cecil Stoughton, Office of the Military Aide to the
President. Together, their work constitutes almost day to
day photographic documentation of President Kennedy's
activities during his time as President of the United States.

Unless noted otherwise, President Kennedy is the central
subject in the photographs of the events, ceremonies,
meetings, visits or trips listed herein.

Photographs in the "KN" and "AR" series are to be found
by the negative numbers listed after each event. "ST" series
photographs are arranged first chronologically, and then
numerically by the negative file numbers.


These photographs are in the Public Domain.









14 April 1986
AG

Revised 12 March 2012
W. Anthony Marsh

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Limousine photographs - Chronological Listing

DATE Y/M/D|ROLL NUMBER |POV| LOCALE |DIGNITARY, notes

1961 POF/PSF/Continental-3 Publicity photo Shows
privacy window as originally installed
61/06/15 ST-141-1/WH61 R WHCA garage, Washington D.C. installing
radio under dash
61/06/15 ST-141-2/WH61 L WHCA garage, Washington D.C. installing
telephone in back seat
61/06/15 ST-141-3/WH61 L WHCA garage, Washington D.C. checking
dash components
61/06/15 ST-141-4/WH61 R WHCA garage, Washington D.C. dash
components installed
61/01/15 ST-141-5/WH61 R WHCA garage, Washington D.C. installing
controls under dash
61/06/15 ST-141-6/WH61 R WHCA garage, Washington D.C. installing
2-way radio under right seat
61/06/15 ST-141-7/WH61 RR WHCA garage, Washington D.C. license
plate AZ * 691
61/06/15 ST-141-8/WH61 F WHCA garage, Washington D.C. testing spot
lights
61/06/15 ST-141-9/WH61 LF WHCA garage, Washington D.C. shows
steering wheel and microphone
61/06/15 ST-141-10/WH61 RR WHCA garage, Washington D.C. license
plate AZ * 691
61/06/15 ST-141-11/WH61 F WHCA garage, Washington D.C. testing spot
lights
61/06/15 ST-141-12/WH61 LR WHCA garage, Washington D.C. shows left
side contol panel, radio
61/06/15 ST-141-13/WH61 R WHCA garage, Washington D.C. shows right
side contol panel, telephone
61/06/15 ST-141-14/WH61 L WHCA garage, Washington D.C. shows right
side contol panel, rear seat
61/06/15 ST-141-15/WH61 L WHCA garage, Washington D.C. shows right
side contol panel, rear seat
61/06/15 ST-141-16/WH61 R WHCA garage, Washington D.C. installing
controls under dash
61/06/15 ST-141-18/WH61 R WHCA garage, Washington D.C. installed
controls under dash
61/06/15 ST-A6-2-61 LF White House, Washington D.C. Delivery of
GG-300
61/06/15 KN-C18065 RF White House, Washington D.C. shows foot
rests on side of limo for SS agents
61/06/15 KN-C18066 LF White House, Washington D.C. demonstrates
rear seat in raised position
61/07/11 ST-A6-1-61 RF Andrews AFB, Maryland Mohammad
Ayub Khan, President of Pakistan
61/07/11 AR 6687-A L Washington, D.C. rear section
of bubbletop on, sunny day
61/07/11 AR 6687-C NOT IN FOLDER
61/07/11 AR 6687-D LF Washington, D.C. Mohammad
Ayub Khan, President of Pakistan
61/08/11 ST-A12-4-61 LF Washington National Airport Fulbert
Youlou, President of the Republic of Congo
61/09/19 ST-210-09-61 DUPLICATE NOT GG-300
61/09/19 ST-210-10-61 NOT GG-300
61/09/19 ST-210-12-61 DUPLICATE NOT GG-300
61/09/19 ST-210-12A-61 White Lincoln
62/05/22 AR 7260-D RF Félix
Houphouët-Boigny, President of Ivory Coast
62/05/23 KN-C21940 LF Félix
Houphouët-Boigny, President of Ivory Coast
62/11/12 STC-80-12-62 RF
62/11/12 STC-80-13-62 RF DUPLICATE
62/11/26 ST-A9-1-62 L
62/11/26 ST-A9-10-62 RR Key West, Florida White
Lincoln V.F. 101
62/11/26 ST-A9-11-62 RR Boca Chica NAS, Florida White
Lincoln V.F. 101
62/11/26 ST-499-2-62 L Homestead AFB, Florida White
Lincoln V.F. 101
62/11/26 ST-499-21-62 LF Boca Chica NAS, Florida White
Lincoln V.F. 101
62/11/26 ST-499-22-62 LF Boca Chica NAS, Florida White
Lincoln V.F. 101
62/11/26 ST-499-23-62 LF Boca Chica NAS, Florida White
Lincoln V.F. 101
62/11/26 ST-499-26-62 LF Boca Chica NAS, Florida White
Lincoln V.F. 101
62/11/26 ST-499-32-62 L Homestead AFB, Florida White
Lincoln V.F. 101
62/11/26 STC-80-2-62
62/11/26 STC-80-5-62
62/11/26 STC-80-9-62 RF
62/11/26 STC-80-13-62 RF
63/01/21 KN-26120 NOT IN FOLDER
63/02/20 STC-35-1-63 RF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-3-63 LF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-4-63 LF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-5-63 LF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-6-63 LF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-7-63 RF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-8-63 RF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-9-63 RF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-10-63 RF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-11-63 LF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-12-63 RF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-13-63 RF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-14-63 RF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-15-63 RF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-16-63 RF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-17-63 R Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-18-63 RF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-19-63 LF Washington, D.C. Rómulo
Betancourt, President of Venezuela
63/02/20 STC-35-20-63
63/02/27 KNC-26912 L Washington, D.C.
63/03/27 AR 7791-I RF Washington, D.C. Hassan II,
King of Morocco
63/03/27 AR 7791-J RF Washington, D.C. Hassan II,
King of Morocco
63/03/27 AR 7791-K RF Washington, D.C. Hassan II,
King of Morocco
63/03/27 AR 7791-L RF Washington, D.C. Hassan II,
King of Morocco
63/03/27 AR 7791-N R Washington, D.C. Hassan II,
King of Morocco
63/03/27 STC-57-2-63
63/03/27 STC-57-4-63 LF
63/03/27 STC-57-7-63 L
63/03/27 STC-57-12-63
63/06/04 KNC-28938 R
63/06/04 KNC-28939 REAR
63/06/04 KNC-28940 R
63/06/04 KNC-28941 R
63/06/04 STC-200-1-63
63/06/04 STC-200-9-63
63/06/04 STC-200-10-63 LF
63/06/04 STC-200-11-63 L
63/06/04 STC-200-16-63 L
63/06/06? STC-206-46-63 LF
63/06/8 STC-206-24-63 LF night
63/06/8 STC-206-41-63 RR night
63/06/20 STC-219-7-63 L
63/06/20 STC-219-13-63 R
63/06/25 KNC-29254 LF
63/06/25 KNC-29260 L
63/06/25 KNC-29321 RF
63/06/25 STA-7-5-63
63/06/25 STC-230-12-63
63/06/25 STC-230-24-63
63/06/25 STC-230-28-63
63/06/26 KNC-29293
63/06/26 WHCF GI 2-12/H R West Berlin, Germany SS agents
standing on rear bumper of limo
63/09/06 KNC-29905
63/09/06 KNC-29906 REAR
63/09/06 KNC-29907
63/09/06 KNC-29908
63/09/06 KNC-29909
63/09/06 KNC-29910
63/09/06 KNC-29911
63/09/06 KNC-29912
63/09/06 KNC-29918
63/10/01 KNC-30047 Washington, D.C. Haile Selassie,
Emperor of Ethiopia
63/10/01 KNC-30048 Washington, D.C. Haile Selassie,
Emperor of Ethiopia
63/10/01 KNC-30049 Washington, D.C. Haile Selassie,
Emperor of Ethiopia
63/10/01 KNC-30055 Washington, D.C. Haile Selassie,
Emperor of Ethiopia
63/10/01 KNC-30057 Washington, D.C. Haile Selassie,
Emperor of Ethiopia
63/10/01 KNC-30058 Washington, D.C. Haile Selassie,
Emperor of Ethiopia
63/10/01 STC-307-1-63 Washington, D.C. Haile Selassie,
Emperor of Ethiopia
63/10/01 STC-307-4-63 Washington, D.C. Haile Selassie,
Emperor of Ethiopia
63/10/01 STC-307-6-63 Washington, D.C. Haile Selassie,
Emperor of Ethiopia
63/10/01 STC-307-22-63 Washington, D.C. Haile Selassie,
Emperor of Ethiopia
63/10/01 STC-307-33-63 Washington, D.C. Haile Selassie,
Emperor of Ethiopia
63/10/01 STC-307-34-63 Washington, D.C. Haile Selassie,
Emperor of Ethiopia
63/10/10 KN-24461
63/10/15 STC-336-2-63
63/10/15 STC-336-3-63 L Washington, D.C. Georgios
Papandreou, Prime Minister of Greece
63/10/15 STC-333-15-63 Washington, D.C. Georgios
Papandreou, Prime Minister of Greece
63/10/15 STC-336-16-63 Washington, D.C. Georgios
Papandreou, Prime Minister of Greece
63/11/18 STC-401-23-63 Tampa, FLorida rear seat raised
63/11/18 STC-401-24-63 Tampa, FLorida rear seat raised
63/11/22 STC-420-46-63 Fort Worth, Texas White limo with
red trim
63/11/22 STC-420-47-63 Fort Worth, Texas WHite limo with
red trim
63/11/22 STC-420-48-63 Fort Worth, Texas WHite limo with
red trim
63/11/22 STC-420-14-63 Kelly AFB San Antonio,TX chrome topping
is undented
63/11/22 STC-420-95-63 Kelly AFB San Antonio,TX chrome topping
is undented
63/11/22 ST-420-21-63 REAR Main St. Dallas, Texas VP SS follow-up
car door is open
63/11/22 ST-420-22-63 Elm St. Dallas, Texas shows Newman
family on the ground
63/11/22 ST-527-1-63 LR Parkland Hospital, Dallas bubbletop has
been taken out of the trunk
63/11/22 ST-527-2-63 RR Parkland Hospital, Dallas bubbletop has
not been put on yet
63/11/22 ST-527-3-63 RR Parkland Hospital, Dallas bubbletop has
not been put on yet
63/11/22 ST-527-4-63 LR Parkland Hospital, Dallas bucket of water
next to LR door, putting top on
63/11/22 ST-527-5-63 LR Parkland Hospital, Dallas bucket of water
next to LR door, top is on

[bigdog]

Nobody has ever disputed that at times SS agents rode the bumper of the
Presidential limo or were close behind. There are also pictures taken
elsewhere when they weren't close behind and as DVP's picture shows the
Queen Mary was sometimes farther back than it was in Dallas. Those
decisions were made on a case by case basis. Some of the pictures you
posted show agents close by earlier in the motorcade route. They got close
when the crowds got close. There was no SS stand down in Dallas. JFK got
the same level of protection that he hard received in numerous other
places both home and abroad.

[Bud]

On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 3:28:58 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 9/21/2016 12:16 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
> > http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
> >
> > Newest nail added to the CTers' coffin regarding the "Standdown"
> > nonsense....
> >
> > In September 2016, I came across another picture of JFK riding in a
> > motorcade prior to 11/22/63, with this one showing virtually no security
> > around JFK's car at all. Not a single moving police motorcycle is visible
> > in the picture. JFK is standing up even! No agents on the bumper.
>
> So what?

<snicker> You don`t know? Think someone shooting bullets into his body.

>Anecdotal. It's called selection bias, something you made
> famous. You don't point out the reason why those conditions were
> different from Dallas.

If you have an idea spit it out. Make an actual argument just to see
what it is like.

> > Spectators standing in high places overlooking the parade route. And, in
> > addition, the Secret Service follow-up car is not nearly as close to the
> > bumper of the President's car here as it usually is.
> >
>
> Nothing new. Nothing unusual.

You may not be aware of this, since you`ve only frequented newsgroups
devoted to this subject for years and year but some conspiracy hobbyists
make an issue about the protection afforded Kennedy in Dallas.

> > But since President Kennedy wasn't killed in El Paso, Texas, in June of
> > 1963 (which is where and when this photo was taken), no conspiracy
> > theorist who believes in the "Secret Service Standdown" theory ever brings
>
> You need to identify the ONE conspiracy kook who invented the "Secret
> Service Standdown" theory. You never talked to him. I did. I told him at
> the time that it was STUPID. McAdams allows me to use that word here today
> because Vince Palamara never posts here any more.

You think Vince Palamara is the only conspiracy hobbyist to voice
suspicions over the protection afforded Kennedy by the Secret Service in
Dallas on the day he was shot?

> > up photographs like this one below when it comes to comparing the security
> > seen here versus the security seen in Dealey Plaza on November 22nd.
> > (Photo courtesy of Steve Roe via Facebook.) ....
> >
>
> And I can show you the photos of men standing on the new running boards
> built under the frame of the limo. So what? They instantly realized it was
> a stupid idea (doesn't post here) so it was never used. I can also show
> you foreign trips with SS agents riding on the back bumper. I can also
> show you JFK ordering agents off the limo. I can also show you photos of
> Hosty riding on the back bumper in Dallas, violating that order.
>
> You keep comparing apples to oranges, but you are a lemon.

What idea do you think you are arguing against?

> > http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--wKwtSLExUo/V-BWcN5x2VI/AAAAAAABKj0/iAJ6CJ_dojo2NMfYONzutL-zHY6jUGQLwCLcB/s2000/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
> >

[mainframetech]

On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 5:09:42 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/08/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-42.html


So where's the response to my list of photos with SS men on and around
the limousine? Going to forget that one and think up another LN mistake?

Chris

[David Von Pein]

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/debating-jfk-case-60-part-series.html

[Bud]

On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 7:38:20 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:

Secret Service agents rode the back of the limo in Dallas.

http://www.cnn.com/video/us/2010/11/21/todd.jfk.secret.service.cnn.640x360.jpg

[David Von Pein]

CHRIS/FRAME SAID:

So where's the response to my list of photos with SS men on and around the
limousine?

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Here (for the second time)....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html

[mainframetech]

WRONG again! DVP just disputed it above. Where were you when we were
talking about it? There was an obvious stand-down in Dallas, and it was a
surprise to the SS agents that weren't in on the change:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XY02Qkuc_f8

Watching the agent on the ground being told to come back to the
following car and get in shows his puzzlement at this change in schedule.

Dallas was known to be full of JFK haters, yet they decided to stay
away from the limousine? And that makes sense to you. Of course.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

Silly. Only Hosty and he was disobeying orders.

[Anthony Marsh]

Oh, like 2 or 3 years ago.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/24/2016 12:38 PM, Bud wrote:
> On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 3:28:58 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 9/21/2016 12:16 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
>>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
>>>
>>> Newest nail added to the CTers' coffin regarding the "Standdown"
>>> nonsense....
>>>
>>> In September 2016, I came across another picture of JFK riding in a
>>> motorcade prior to 11/22/63, with this one showing virtually no security
>>> around JFK's car at all. Not a single moving police motorcycle is visible
>>> in the picture. JFK is standing up even! No agents on the bumper.
>>
>> So what?
>
> <snicker> You don`t know? Think someone shooting bullets into his body.
>

Agents standing on the bumper could not block all shots.

>> Anecdotal. It's called selection bias, something you made
>> famous. You don't point out the reason why those conditions were
>> different from Dallas.
>
> If you have an idea spit it out. Make an actual argument just to see
> what it is like.
>

I've made the arguments thousands of times. Agents standing on the rear
bumper would not have blocked the shots in Dealey Plaza.

>>> Spectators standing in high places overlooking the parade route. And, in
>>> addition, the Secret Service follow-up car is not nearly as close to the
>>> bumper of the President's car here as it usually is.
>>>
>>
>> Nothing new. Nothing unusual.
>
> You may not be aware of this, since you`ve only frequented newsgroups
> devoted to this subject for years and year but some conspiracy hobbyists
> make an issue about the protection afforded Kennedy in Dallas.
>

Not aware of it? I was at the conferences where Vince Palamara talked
about and I told him why he is wrong.

>>> But since President Kennedy wasn't killed in El Paso, Texas, in June of
>>> 1963 (which is where and when this photo was taken), no conspiracy
>>> theorist who believes in the "Secret Service Standdown" theory ever brings
>>
>> You need to identify the ONE conspiracy kook who invented the "Secret
>> Service Standdown" theory. You never talked to him. I did. I told him at
>> the time that it was STUPID. McAdams allows me to use that word here today
>> because Vince Palamara never posts here any more.
>
> You think Vince Palamara is the only conspiracy hobbyist to voice
> suspicions over the protection afforded Kennedy by the Secret Service in
> Dallas on the day he was shot?
>

Of course not. But he is the most prominent.

>>> up photographs like this one below when it comes to comparing the security
>>> seen here versus the security seen in Dealey Plaza on November 22nd.
>>> (Photo courtesy of Steve Roe via Facebook.) ....
>>>
>>
>> And I can show you the photos of men standing on the new running boards
>> built under the frame of the limo. So what? They instantly realized it was
>> a stupid idea (doesn't post here) so it was never used. I can also show
>> you foreign trips with SS agents riding on the back bumper. I can also
>> show you JFK ordering agents off the limo. I can also show you photos of
>> Hosty riding on the back bumper in Dallas, violating that order.
>>
>> You keep comparing apples to oranges, but you are a lemon.
>
> What idea do you think you are arguing against?
>

Your silly argument that it was normal to have SS agents riding on the
back of the limo and that would have prevented JFK from being shot.

>>> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--wKwtSLExUo/V-BWcN5x2VI/AAAAAAABKj0/iAJ6CJ_dojo2NMfYONzutL-zHY6jUGQLwCLcB/s2000/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
>>>
>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

Not true. There was a DO NOT STAND order. After JFK told them in Tampa
to stay off the back bumper.
According to Clint Hill:

"...the President had frequently stated that he did not want agents to
ride on these steps during a motorcade except when necessary. He had
repeated this wish only a few days before, during his visit to Tampa,
Florida."[5]

[bigdog]

In order for you to claim there was an SS stand down in Dallas, you need
to show that the security measures were unique to Dallas. IOW, you need to
show that it was the only time agents were not on the bumper or close by.
Of course that isn't the case. We have examples of SS agents on the bumper
and examples in which they weren't. DVP's photo shows a case where not
only were agents not on the bumper, the follow up car was well behind
JFK's limo. In finest conspiracy hobbyist tradition, you choose to cherry
pick the examples to make your point. When the photographic evidence is
looked at as a WHOLE, something conspiracy hobbyists hate to do when it
comes to evidence, it is clear that there was no standard for whether
agents rode the bumper and it would appear it was done according to the
situation. In Dallas alone there were times the agents were on the bumper
and times they dropped back to the Queen Mary. It seems the decision as to
whether to get close was dictated by the density of the crowds. Where
people were closing in the agents chose to get very close. When the crowds
thinned out and the people were back on the sidewalks, as was the case in
DP, the agents chose to drop back to the Queen Mary. There was nothing
done in Dallas that we didn't see done numerous times before.

[Anthony Marsh]

No, that is wrong.

> Dallas was known to be full of JFK haters, yet they decided to stay
> away from the limousine? And that makes sense to you. Of course.
>

What do you think could have prevented the assassination?
For WC defenders:
1. Put Oswald in jail for shooting at Walker.
2. Keep Oswald on the Watch List after he threatened to kill the President.
3.Take the case away from Hosty and give it to the police.

For conspiracy believers:
Fire Helms.

Never get into the assassination business by trying to assassinate Castro.

> Chris
>

[Bud]

On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:13:54 AM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:

Another bad idea conspiracy hobbyists can go nowhere with.

[mainframetech]

That is a link to your website. I'm not here to have to go there every
time you want to say something to me, and I'm not here to up your hit
count wither. If you have something to answer my proof, please say it
here. If you've said something elsewhere, copying and pasting isn't too
tedious task.

Where it stands now: You pointed out that the limo wasn't guarded by
SS very often and presented a photo of the limo unguarded. I then put up
may photos of SS agents all over the limo with JFK in it, and they were on
it or walking beside it too.

As well, you've erased the discussion we were having in this thread.
So where is it? Were you afraid that others would see it?

Chris

[Bud]

On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:06:09 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 9/24/2016 12:38 PM, Bud wrote:
> > On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 3:28:58 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >> On 9/21/2016 12:16 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
> >>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
> >>>
> >>> Newest nail added to the CTers' coffin regarding the "Standdown"
> >>> nonsense....
> >>>
> >>> In September 2016, I came across another picture of JFK riding in a
> >>> motorcade prior to 11/22/63, with this one showing virtually no security
> >>> around JFK's car at all. Not a single moving police motorcycle is visible
> >>> in the picture. JFK is standing up even! No agents on the bumper.
> >>
> >> So what?
> >
> > <snicker> You don`t know? Think someone shooting bullets into his body.
> >
>
> Agents standing on the bumper could not block all shots.

What does that have to do with anything?

> >> Anecdotal. It's called selection bias, something you made
> >> famous. You don't point out the reason why those conditions were
> >> different from Dallas.
> >
> > If you have an idea spit it out. Make an actual argument just to see
> > what it is like.
> >
>
> I've made the arguments thousands of times. Agents standing on the rear
> bumper would not have blocked the shots in Dealey Plaza.

Did DVP take the position that they would? If not, this is just another
one of your strawmen.

You don`t even understand the point DVP was making, why did you respond
at all?

> >>> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--wKwtSLExUo/V-BWcN5x2VI/AAAAAAABKj0/iAJ6CJ_dojo2NMfYONzutL-zHY6jUGQLwCLcB/s2000/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
> >>>
> >
> >

[bigdog]

On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:13:54 AM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:

No he didn't dispute that. He disputed that they ALWAYS rode the bumper
and he showed a picture that proved his point. Being logically challenged,
you don't seem to understand the difference between the words "sometimes"
and "always".

[mainframetech]

I don't need to do a damn thing that YOU think needs to be done. I have
made the statement, and shown the video and each person can maker their
own decisions about what they are seeing when the SS agent throws up his
hands in frustration. Especially in a town of JDFK haters like Milteer
who said a few days ahead of the murder that JFK would be killed from the
top of a business building by a rifle.

> Of course that isn't the case. We have examples of SS agents on the bumper
> and examples in which they weren't. DVP's photo shows a case where not
> only were agents not on the bumper, the follow up car was well behind
> JFK's limo. In finest conspiracy hobbyist tradition, you choose to cherry
> pick the examples to make your point. When the photographic evidence is
> looked at as a WHOLE, something conspiracy hobbyists hate to do when it
> comes to evidence, it is clear that there was no standard for whether
> agents rode the bumper and it would appear it was done according to the
> situation. In Dallas alone there were times the agents were on the bumper
> and times they dropped back to the Queen Mary. It seems the decision as to
> whether to get close was dictated by the density of the crowds. Where
> people were closing in the agents chose to get very close. When the crowds
> thinned out and the people were back on the sidewalks, as was the case in
> DP, the agents chose to drop back to the Queen Mary. There was nothing
> done in Dallas that we didn't see done numerous times before.

So you think that a town full of JDFK haters isn't good enough reason
to close in on the POTUS?

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

Not really. There are two different ideas here.
1. Leaving behind the agent at the airport.
2. No agents STANDING on the rear bumper.
That is not unique to Dallas. That was the case for many other
motorcades. But the stand down order to not have agents standing on the
back bumper came directly from the President during the Tampa motorcade.

> show that it was the only time agents were not on the bumper or close by.

Time is not the critical factor. Also when there was a rule.

> Of course that isn't the case. We have examples of SS agents on the bumper
> and examples in which they weren't. DVP's photo shows a case where not
> only were agents not on the bumper, the follow up car was well behind
> JFK's limo. In finest conspiracy hobbyist tradition, you choose to cherry
> pick the examples to make your point. When the photographic evidence is
> looked at as a WHOLE, something conspiracy hobbyists hate to do when it
> comes to evidence, it is clear that there was no standard for whether
> agents rode the bumper and it would appear it was done according to the
> situation. In Dallas alone there were times the agents were on the bumper
> and times they dropped back to the Queen Mary. It seems the decision as to
> whether to get close was dictated by the density of the crowds. Where
> people were closing in the agents chose to get very close. When the crowds
> thinned out and the people were back on the sidewalks, as was the case in
> DP, the agents chose to drop back to the Queen Mary. There was nothing
> done in Dallas that we didn't see done numerous times before.
>

As usual, your only job here is to cover up for your fellow WC
defenders. JFK ordered the agents off the rear bumper.
What they did before that does not apply.

[Jason Burke]

Golly, gee, Chris. You asked for something. You were pointed to it twice.
If you want to close your eyes, scream la, la, la, and pretend the
answer hasn't been presented to you, well...

[bigdog]

On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:13:14 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> > CHRIS/FRAME SAID:
> >
> > So where's the response to my list of photos with SS men on and around the
> > limousine?
> >
> >
> > DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
> >
> > Here (for the second time)....
> >
> > http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
>
>
> That is a link to your website. I'm not here to have to go there every
> time you want to say something to me, and I'm not here to up your hit
> count wither. If you have something to answer my proof, please say it
> here. If you've said something elsewhere, copying and pasting isn't too
> tedious task.
>

This from a guy who has made it a habit of posting links to every kook
website he can find and pretend that by itself proves his point.

> Where it stands now: You pointed out that the limo wasn't guarded by
> SS very often and presented a photo of the limo unguarded. I then put up
> may photos of SS agents all over the limo with JFK in it, and they were on
> it or walking beside it too.
>

Which establishes that sometimes the SS rode the bumper and sometimes they
did not. That pretty much shoots down your claim there was a stand down in
Dallas when we have plenty of photographic proof that it was not at all
uncommon for the agents not be riding the bumper. There was nothing unique
about the measures taken in Dallas.

> As well, you've erased the discussion we were having in this thread.
> So where is it? Were you afraid that others would see it?
>

Why would anyone be afraid or your silly arguments?

[mainframetech]

You're being ridiculous again. You won't find me saying that the SS
agents ALWAYS rode on the limo. You will find me saying that the 'stand
down' was just that. The 2 agents that normally would walk along side and
ride the platforms were both called back to the Queen Mary, and the one
guy did NOT understand and was frustrated with the orders. Try and turn
it into something else, it's still obvious to anyone who isn't so biased.

Chris

[slats]

bigdog <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:b1950ac3-375e-49f1...@googlegroups.com:

Aside from the Tampa trip a few days earlier, you won't find any photos
of agents riding the bumpers in the US. Outside of the country? Yes. In
the US? No.

[David Von Pein]

That's not true at all, slats. Clint Hill rode the bumper at least 4 times
in Dallas on Nov. 22, including this example....

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LFsWb1KFxvI/T9L1xQ-Z_xI/AAAAAAAABoc/eop5u5t3NDc/s1600/Dallas-Motorcade-11-22-63.jpg

[mainframetech]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 5:51:58 PM UTC-4, slats wrote:

See above where there is a list of SS agents riding on the limo in
other US towns.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/27/2016 12:17 AM, Bud wrote:
> On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:06:09 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 9/24/2016 12:38 PM, Bud wrote:
>>> On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 3:28:58 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>>>> On 9/21/2016 12:16 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
>>>>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Newest nail added to the CTers' coffin regarding the "Standdown"
>>>>> nonsense....
>>>>>
>>>>> In September 2016, I came across another picture of JFK riding in a
>>>>> motorcade prior to 11/22/63, with this one showing virtually no security
>>>>> around JFK's car at all. Not a single moving police motorcycle is visible
>>>>> in the picture. JFK is standing up even! No agents on the bumper.
>>>>
>>>> So what?
>>>
>>> <snicker> You don`t know? Think someone shooting bullets into his body.
>>>
>>
>> Agents standing on the bumper could not block all shots.
>
> What does that have to do with anything?
>

Some idiot said SS agents standing on the rear bumper would protect JFK
from being shot.

>>>> Anecdotal. It's called selection bias, something you made
>>>> famous. You don't point out the reason why those conditions were
>>>> different from Dallas.
>>>
>>> If you have an idea spit it out. Make an actual argument just to see
>>> what it is like.
>>>
>>
>> I've made the arguments thousands of times. Agents standing on the rear
>> bumper would not have blocked the shots in Dealey Plaza.
>
> Did DVP take the position that they would? If not, this is just another
> one of your strawmen.

I'm not sure DVP was ever That stupid, but someone here was.

You don't even understand what we were talking about so why did you butt
in? Just to make a gratuitous personal attack on me. Beats working for a
living.

>>>>> http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--wKwtSLExUo/V-BWcN5x2VI/AAAAAAABKj0/iAJ6CJ_dojo2NMfYONzutL-zHY6jUGQLwCLcB/s2000/JFK-Motorcade.jpg
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/27/2016 12:17 AM, Bud wrote:

> On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:06:09 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 9/24/2016 12:38 PM, Bud wrote:
>>> On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 3:28:58 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>>>> On 9/21/2016 12:16 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
>>>>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Newest nail added to the CTers' coffin regarding the "Standdown"
>>>>> nonsense....
>>>>>
>>>>> In September 2016, I came across another picture of JFK riding in a
>>>>> motorcade prior to 11/22/63, with this one showing virtually no security
>>>>> around JFK's car at all. Not a single moving police motorcycle is visible
>>>>> in the picture. JFK is standing up even! No agents on the bumper.
>>>>
>>>> So what?
>>>
>>> <snicker> You don`t know? Think someone shooting bullets into his body.
>>>
>>
>> Agents standing on the bumper could not block all shots.
>
> What does that have to do with anything?
>

I am pointing out the error of that earlier position.

>>>> Anecdotal. It's called selection bias, something you made
>>>> famous. You don't point out the reason why those conditions were
>>>> different from Dallas.
>>>
>>> If you have an idea spit it out. Make an actual argument just to see
>>> what it is like.
>>>
>>
>> I've made the arguments thousands of times. Agents standing on the rear
>> bumper would not have blocked the shots in Dealey Plaza.
>
> Did DVP take the position that they would? If not, this is just another
> one of your strawmen.

I didn't say DVP did. I don't think he's THAT stupid. But some idiot
here did.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/27/2016 3:49 PM, bigdog wrote:
> On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>> On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:13:14 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>>> CHRIS/FRAME SAID:
>>>
>>> So where's the response to my list of photos with SS men on and around the
>>> limousine?
>>>
>>>
>>> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>>>
>>> Here (for the second time)....
>>>
>>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
>>
>>
>> That is a link to your website. I'm not here to have to go there every
>> time you want to say something to me, and I'm not here to up your hit
>> count wither. If you have something to answer my proof, please say it
>> here. If you've said something elsewhere, copying and pasting isn't too
>> tedious task.
>>
>
> This from a guy who has made it a habit of posting links to every kook
> website he can find and pretend that by itself proves his point.
>
>> Where it stands now: You pointed out that the limo wasn't guarded by
>> SS very often and presented a photo of the limo unguarded. I then put up
>> may photos of SS agents all over the limo with JFK in it, and they were on
>> it or walking beside it too.
>>
>
> Which establishes that sometimes the SS rode the bumper and sometimes they
> did not. That pretty much shoots down your claim there was a stand down in

No, it doesn't. The GET OFF MY DAMN CAR order came a week before Dallas.

> Dallas when we have plenty of photographic proof that it was not at all
> uncommon for the agents not be riding the bumper. There was nothing unique
> about the measures taken in Dallas.
>

Again, agent, singular, not agents, plural.
Learn English.

>> As well, you've erased the discussion we were having in this thread.
>> So where is it? Were you afraid that others would see it?
>>
>
> Why would anyone be afraid or your silly arguments?
>

Because you have no facts.

[mainframetech]

On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 3:49:56 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
> On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:13:14 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> > > CHRIS/FRAME SAID:
> > >
> > > So where's the response to my list of photos with SS men on and around the
> > > limousine?
> > >
> > >
> > > DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
> > >
> > > Here (for the second time)....
> > >
> > > http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
> >
> >
> > That is a link to your website. I'm not here to have to go there every
> > time you want to say something to me, and I'm not here to up your hit
> > count wither. If you have something to answer my proof, please say it
> > here. If you've said something elsewhere, copying and pasting isn't too
> > tedious task.
> >
>
> This from a guy who has made it a habit of posting links to every kook
> website he can find and pretend that by itself proves his point.
>

WRONG as usual! You apparently forgot that the only websites that will
post information on conspiracy are those that aren't locked into the WCR.
But you're fully capable of making commentary about the item that I post a
link to if you dare.

> > Where it stands now: You pointed out that the limo wasn't guarded by
> > SS very often and presented a photo of the limo unguarded. I then put up
> > may photos of SS agents all over the limo with JFK in it, and they were on
> > it or walking beside it too.
> >
>
> Which establishes that sometimes the SS rode the bumper and sometimes they
> did not. That pretty much shoots down your claim there was a stand down in
> Dallas when we have plenty of photographic proof that it was not at all
> uncommon for the agents not be riding the bumper. There was nothing unique
> about the measures taken in Dallas.
>

You've proven nothing, and your name isn't DVP, who apparently isn't
capable of defending himself and needs you to step in for him. Whether
anyone was on the step or not has nothing to do with the fact that there
was a stand down and it was obvious from the video. We're discussing a
town where there were many JFK haters, yet there was a stand down of the
men who would ride the platforms, which may have reduced the chances of
JFK being killed.

> > As well, you've erased the discussion we were having in this thread.
> > So where is it? Were you afraid that others would see it?
> >
>
> Why would anyone be afraid or your silly arguments?

WRONG! I didn't say afraid of my arguments, but afraid of others
seeing them. Think it through!

Chris

[mainframetech]

As usual you seem to have no clue what is going on around you. It's
gone beyond the point where I could help you out of your quandary.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

Something like that.
But you need to refine your stipulations. Someone might have photos from
training exercises or the delivery of the limo or something.

[Anthony Marsh]

You mean at the airport? That was natural procedure. Once the limo
starts out they go back to the Queen Mary. They could never find a SS
agent who could run next to the limo at 45 MPH.

>
>
>

[slats]

David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote in
news:530fdc25-2fa9-4211...@googlegroups.com:

I'm talking about Kennedy's normal SS detail. Jackie rarely accompanied
her husband on domestic political trips. Rarer still was the both of them
riding in an open limousine. Therefore, the Texas trip was an anomoly.
Clint Hill, super protective of her, either didn't receive Kennedy's
instructions regarding agents riding the bumper or he didn't care.

[claviger]

There were intel alerts about a possible threat in Chicago and Tampa.
The Chicago parade was cancelled but the President refused to cancel Tampa
so the security was enhanced for that parade. The SS wanted the same
level for Dallas but JFK refused and wanted the people of Dallas to see he
was not afraid to ride through their downtown without being surrounded by
bodyguards. He even wanted motorcycle escort to be on his back bumper
rather than two in tandem on either side and did not want SSA on the back
bumper, the reason Clint Hill did this so the President wouldn't notice.*
The Dallas police would have instinctively used the tandem motorcycle
formation but the President insisted no motorcycles next to the Limousine.
Bobby Hargis said he was surprised by that decision and it was the first
parade he ever rode in that type formation.

* https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184627/

[Anthony Marsh]

That was not the question. It was not routine. Hill violated orders.

[bigdog]

You're right. You don't have to do anything. You can continue to make
empty claims that you can't substantiate. You've been doing that for a
long time. There was no SS stand down in Dallas. The agents did what they
always did. They made judgement calls as to when the situation called for
them to be on the bumper and when they should fall back. They balanced
security concerns against their bosses wishes not to have his bodyguards
hovering over him in the motorcade. In Dallas as in other places, when the
crowds were closing in they would hop up on the bumper so they could be
close by if need be. When the crowds thinned out as they did in DP, theY

chose to drop back to the Queen Mary.

>
>
> > Of course that isn't the case. We have examples of SS agents on the bumper
> > and examples in which they weren't. DVP's photo shows a case where not
> > only were agents not on the bumper, the follow up car was well behind
> > JFK's limo. In finest conspiracy hobbyist tradition, you choose to cherry
> > pick the examples to make your point. When the photographic evidence is
> > looked at as a WHOLE, something conspiracy hobbyists hate to do when it
> > comes to evidence, it is clear that there was no standard for whether
> > agents rode the bumper and it would appear it was done according to the
> > situation. In Dallas alone there were times the agents were on the bumper
> > and times they dropped back to the Queen Mary. It seems the decision as to
> > whether to get close was dictated by the density of the crowds. Where
> > people were closing in the agents chose to get very close. When the crowds
> > thinned out and the people were back on the sidewalks, as was the case in
> > DP, the agents chose to drop back to the Queen Mary. There was nothing
> > done in Dallas that we didn't see done numerous times before.
>
>
>
> So you think that a town full of JDFK haters isn't good enough reason
> to close in on the POTUS?
>

The crowds were very friendly in Dallas. JFK had been given an
enthusiastic reception. Dallas was not unique in having JFK haters. They
existed everywhere he went. That is true of every president. The Dallas
trip was a political one and JFK liked using motorcades to get close to
the people (voters) wherever he went. He thought it made for better
appearances not to have his bodyguards riding his bumper so they did it
only when they judged that the situation warranted doing that.

[bigdog]

There was no normal. Each situation was unique and the agents made the
decision to ride the bumper on a case-by-case basis.

[Bud]

On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 4:17:35 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 9/27/2016 12:17 AM, Bud wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:06:09 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >> On 9/24/2016 12:38 PM, Bud wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 3:28:58 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >>>> On 9/21/2016 12:16 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
> >>>>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Newest nail added to the CTers' coffin regarding the "Standdown"
> >>>>> nonsense....
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In September 2016, I came across another picture of JFK riding in a
> >>>>> motorcade prior to 11/22/63, with this one showing virtually no security
> >>>>> around JFK's car at all. Not a single moving police motorcycle is visible
> >>>>> in the picture. JFK is standing up even! No agents on the bumper.
> >>>>
> >>>> So what?
> >>>
> >>> <snicker> You don`t know? Think someone shooting bullets into his body.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Agents standing on the bumper could not block all shots.
> >
> > What does that have to do with anything?
> >
>
> I am pointing out the error of that earlier position.

The position that nobody took? What is that called again?

> >>>> Anecdotal. It's called selection bias, something you made
> >>>> famous. You don't point out the reason why those conditions were
> >>>> different from Dallas.
> >>>
> >>> If you have an idea spit it out. Make an actual argument just to see
> >>> what it is like.
> >>>
> >>
> >> I've made the arguments thousands of times. Agents standing on the rear
> >> bumper would not have blocked the shots in Dealey Plaza.
> >
> > Did DVP take the position that they would? If not, this is just another
> > one of your strawmen.
>
> I didn't say DVP did. I don't think he's THAT stupid. But some idiot
> here did.

What you should do is comment right under the person who said that.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/28/2016 4:58 PM, mainframetech wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 3:49:56 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
>> On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>>> On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:13:14 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>>>> CHRIS/FRAME SAID:
>>>>
>>>> So where's the response to my list of photos with SS men on and around the
>>>> limousine?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>>>>
>>>> Here (for the second time)....
>>>>
>>>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
>>>
>>>
>>> That is a link to your website. I'm not here to have to go there every
>>> time you want to say something to me, and I'm not here to up your hit
>>> count wither. If you have something to answer my proof, please say it
>>> here. If you've said something elsewhere, copying and pasting isn't too
>>> tedious task.
>>>
>>
>> This from a guy who has made it a habit of posting links to every kook
>> website he can find and pretend that by itself proves his point.
>>
>
>
> WRONG as usual! You apparently forgot that the only websites that will
> post information on conspiracy are those that aren't locked into the WCR.
> But you're fully capable of making commentary about the item that I post a
> link to if you dare.
>

If the WC defenders really believed in their beloved WC then why do they
never post files from the WC on their Web sites?
It's only the conspiracy Web sites which do.

>
>
>>> Where it stands now: You pointed out that the limo wasn't guarded by
>>> SS very often and presented a photo of the limo unguarded. I then put up
>>> may photos of SS agents all over the limo with JFK in it, and they were on
>>> it or walking beside it too.
>>>
>>
>> Which establishes that sometimes the SS rode the bumper and sometimes they
>> did not. That pretty much shoots down your claim there was a stand down in
>> Dallas when we have plenty of photographic proof that it was not at all
>> uncommon for the agents not be riding the bumper. There was nothing unique
>> about the measures taken in Dallas.
>>
>
>
> You've proven nothing, and your name isn't DVP, who apparently isn't
> capable of defending himself and needs you to step in for him. Whether
> anyone was on the step or not has nothing to do with the fact that there
> was a stand down and it was obvious from the video. We're discussing a
> town where there were many JFK haters, yet there was a stand down of the
> men who would ride the platforms, which may have reduced the chances of
> JFK being killed.
>

No there wasn't. And standing on the rear bumper would not protect JFK
from a shooting high up in an office building. You don't have to believe
that Oswald was one of the shooters, but you have to admit that SOME shots
were fired from the TSBD. Unless you reject science.

[bigdog]

On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 4:58:06 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 3:49:56 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
> > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> > > On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:13:14 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> > > > CHRIS/FRAME SAID:
> > > >
> > > > So where's the response to my list of photos with SS men on and around the
> > > > limousine?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
> > > >
> > > > Here (for the second time)....
> > > >
> > > > http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
> > >
> > >
> > > That is a link to your website. I'm not here to have to go there every
> > > time you want to say something to me, and I'm not here to up your hit
> > > count wither. If you have something to answer my proof, please say it
> > > here. If you've said something elsewhere, copying and pasting isn't too
> > > tedious task.
> > >
> >
> > This from a guy who has made it a habit of posting links to every kook
> > website he can find and pretend that by itself proves his point.
> >
>
>
> WRONG as usual! You apparently forgot that the only websites that will
> post information on conspiracy are those that aren't locked into the WCR.
> But you're fully capable of making commentary about the item that I post a
> link to if you dare.
>

On numerous occasions you have chastised me for not visiting your websites
even though they were ones you had posted links to previously and I had
already checked them out. Now you turn around and tell DVP you can't be
bothered to look at websites he has posted. Once again your double
standards are on display for all to see.

>
>
> > > Where it stands now: You pointed out that the limo wasn't guarded by
> > > SS very often and presented a photo of the limo unguarded. I then put up
> > > may photos of SS agents all over the limo with JFK in it, and they were on
> > > it or walking beside it too.
> > >
> >
> > Which establishes that sometimes the SS rode the bumper and sometimes they
> > did not. That pretty much shoots down your claim there was a stand down in
> > Dallas when we have plenty of photographic proof that it was not at all
> > uncommon for the agents not be riding the bumper. There was nothing unique
> > about the measures taken in Dallas.
> >
>
>
> You've proven nothing, and your name isn't DVP, who apparently isn't
> capable of defending himself and needs you to step in for him.

He's more than capable of defending himself with no help from me. This is
a public forum and anyone is free to join in any conversation. You have
done so yourself on countless occasions. Another example of your double
standards.

> Whether
> anyone was on the step or not has nothing to do with the fact that there
> was a stand down and it was obvious from the video.

Oh, it's obvious. I guess saying that relieves you of any burden to actual
demonstrate that claim.

> We're discussing a
> town where there were many JFK haters, yet there was a stand down of the
> men who would ride the platforms, which may have reduced the chances of
> JFK being killed.
>

There was no stand down in Dallas and JFK haters were in every town JFK
visited. There was nothing unique about Dallas other than LHO working in a
building that the motorcade would pass by.

>
>
> > > As well, you've erased the discussion we were having in this thread.
> > > So where is it? Were you afraid that others would see it?
> > >
> >
> > Why would anyone be afraid or your silly arguments?
>
>
> WRONG! I didn't say afraid of my arguments, but afraid of others
> seeing them. Think it through!
>

Oh, that's a whole lot different. <chuckle>

[David Von Pein]

Chris,

Why do you ignore the fact that the agent who is shrugging his shoulders
at Love Field (Donald Lawton) was *never assigned to be part of the
motorcade* that day?

Lawton's assignment on 11/22/63 was "to remain at the airport to effect
security for the President's departure" (a direct quote from Lawton's
11/30/63 report; see CE2554).

All of this material concerning Lawton and Rybka (and lots more) is laid
out in detail at my webpage on this matter (the one Chris/Frame refuses to
look at). But here it is again anyway, just in case Chris ever wants to
know what the facts are....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html

[mainframetech]

Yep, and the 2 agents had moved out to fill that posirtion of walking
alongside or riding the platforms until ordered to stand down:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSXQYvm57YM

Chris

[mainframetech]

> > made the statement, and shown the video and each person can make their

> > own decisions about what they are seeing when the SS agent throws up his

> > hands in frustration. Especially in a town of JFK haters like Milteer

> > who said a few days ahead of the murder that JFK would be killed from the
> > top of a business building by a rifle.
> >
>
> You're right. You don't have to do anything. You can continue to make
> empty claims that you can't substantiate. You've been doing that for a
> long time. There was no SS stand down in Dallas. The agents did what they
> always did. They made judgement calls as to when the situation called for
> them to be on the bumper and when they should fall back.

Well, now that we've heard your 'expert' opinion of how the Secret
Service was guarding JFK and why they did certain things, when a town is
full of haters of the president, I would think they would want to keep
close and cover as many bases as they could. Milteer's comment about
killing JFK from the top of building with a rifle was known to the FBI,
and they ignored it and didn't pass it along. If you don't believe that,
I can find the cites and links.

They balanced
> security concerns against their bosses wishes not to have his bodyguards
> hovering over him in the motorcade. In Dallas as in other places, when the
> crowds were closing in they would hop up on the bumper so they could be
> close by if need be. When the crowds thinned out as they did in DP, theY
> chose to drop back to the Queen Mary.
>

It's been shown that JFK didn't issue orders for the SS agents to stay
away from the limo. That's a phony story that got started. When you see
the 'stand down' video, there's no doubt that the 2 agents are ORDERED to
come back to the Queen Mary and they didn't "choose to drop back on their
own":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XY02Qkuc_f8

> >
> >
> > > Of course that isn't the case. We have examples of SS agents on the bumper
> > > and examples in which they weren't. DVP's photo shows a case where not
> > > only were agents not on the bumper, the follow up car was well behind
> > > JFK's limo. In finest conspiracy hobbyist tradition, you choose to cherry
> > > pick the examples to make your point. When the photographic evidence is
> > > looked at as a WHOLE, something conspiracy hobbyists hate to do when it
> > > comes to evidence, it is clear that there was no standard for whether
> > > agents rode the bumper and it would appear it was done according to the
> > > situation. In Dallas alone there were times the agents were on the bumper
> > > and times they dropped back to the Queen Mary. It seems the decision as to
> > > whether to get close was dictated by the density of the crowds. Where
> > > people were closing in the agents chose to get very close. When the crowds
> > > thinned out and the people were back on the sidewalks, as was the case in
> > > DP, the agents chose to drop back to the Queen Mary. There was nothing
> > > done in Dallas that we didn't see done numerous times before.
> >
> >
> >

> > So you think that a town full of JFK haters isn't good enough reason

> > to close in on the POTUS?
> >
>
> The crowds were very friendly in Dallas. JFK had been given an
> enthusiastic reception. Dallas was not unique in having JFK haters. They
> existed everywhere he went. That is true of every president. The Dallas
> trip was a political one and JFK liked using motorcades to get close to
> the people (voters) wherever he went. He thought it made for better
> appearances not to have his bodyguards riding his bumper so they did it
> only when they judged that the situation warranted doing that.

Apparently you were unaware (as is often the case) that Joseph Milteer
was known to have made a threat that JFK was to be killed from the top of
a building with a rifle, and after the murder, he crowed about it. The
FBI and the SS were aware of his comments. The crowds on the street were
usually friendly, but Dallas was full of JFK haters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSXQYvm57YM

Chris

[mainframetech]

If you check into that at the following site, you'll find that the SS
agents never got any order from JFK to keep off the limousine. That story
was attributed to Floyds Boring who acted very suspiciously when
questioned by the ARRB. He corrected the misinformation that he had
carried that message about JFK saying for the SS agents to keep off the
limousine:

"One of the earliest and arguably most influential (to this day)
misrepresentation of JFK's relationship to the Secret Service, and in
particular to agents on his various details, can be found in "Death of a
President," by William Manchester. One passage in particular exemplifies
the lengths to which "respected" historians such as Manchester have gone,
knowingly or otherwise, to falsify the record.


"Kennedy grew weary of seeing bodyguards roosting behind him every time he
turned around, and in Tampa on November 18 (1963), just four days before
his death, he dryly asked Agent Floyd Boring to 'keep those Ivy League
charlatans off the back of the car.' Boring wasn't offended. There had
been no animosity in the remark." (1988 Harper & Row/Perennial Library
edition, pp. 37-38)

When asked to comment on the record about that portion of "Death of a
President," Boring said that the statement attributed to him by Manchester
is, to say the least, inaccurate. "He quotes me?" Boring asked
incredulously. "I never told him (that JFK ordered agents off the
limousine). (JFK) was a very nice man, never interfered with us at all."
Indeed, Boring stated that he was not interviewed by Manchester-- a fact
that is confirmed by the book's source notes."

From: http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/limo.html

It may be useful to read the notes at the top of that link that were
written by Vince Palamara. One of the most knowledgeable people about the
Secret Service during 1963 and after.

Chris

[mainframetech]

The agents of the SS thought of JFK as easy to work with. He almost
always took their recommendations. Look at websites by Vince Palamara and
see what they thought of working for JFK.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

Naughty, naughty. That would be like calling the OP stupid.
Not Politically Correct.

[Anthony Marsh]

But there is policy. JFK changed the policy.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/28/2016 10:42 PM, bigdog wrote:

Just stop making up crap. They was no "THEY." ONLY CLint Hill who
disobeyed order. No THEY.

[Anthony Marsh]

He knew. He violated it. He crouched down.

[David Von Pein]

WAS THE BACK OF JFK'S HEAD BLACKED OUT?....
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-895.html

[stevemg...@yahoo.com]

If Hill had been on the rear bumper he likely would have been able to push
JKF down after the second shot. Isn't that, in part, the idea of riding
alongside the limo? Not just to block/obscure a shot but being able to
respond more quickly to an attempt? Yes, I'm guessing here.

Hill has stated in several interviews that since they were at the end of
the motorcade route/visit - the crowds were thinning and they were headed
for the highway - no one would ride on the bumper anyway since the limo
would be traveling too fast.

Oswald - or the shooter - was in a perfect position. It's not hard to
understand why people could think there was a conspiracy. It does seem to
look like JFK was deliberately driven to his death.

[bigdog]

I accidentally hit POST before typing my reply so I'll try again.

That's an excellent piece of information which I was unaware of. It makes
perfect sense. If Lawton was actually supposed to be part of the
motorcade, why would he have started out on foot to begin with. He would
have either been riding the bumper of the President's limo or been on the
Queen Mary. Does anyone think he was suppose to be on foot all the way
from Love Field to DP.

[Anthony Marsh]

I don't support his theory, but he should point out that the report was
made long after the assassination and may be part of the SS trying to
cover up their mistakes. Like saying that no agents went out drinking
the night before. You endorse lies like that.

> All of this material concerning Lawton and Rybka (and lots more) is laid
> out in detail at my webpage on this matter (the one Chris/Frame refuses to
> look at). But here it is again anyway, just in case Chris ever wants to
> know what the facts are....
>

Oh, pleass don't call him Frame. How rude. You can all him Main.

> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
>

[slats]

mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:746653ea-d8ec-474c...@googlegroups.com:

So they decided to "stand down" and murder a man they were fond of and
found cooperative and easy to work with. Sounds logical.

[Anthony Marsh]

Whose web sites? The kook doesn't have a Web site.
Maybe you don't know how to click on a link or use Google.
We can get a fifth grader to help you with that.

The attack on Adlai Stevenson. The hate radio of HL Hunt.

[Anthony Marsh]

True in general, but selection bias.
Sy Hersh found several SS agents who spoke about problems with Kennedy.

> Chris
>

[Anthony Marsh]

Boring was not the only one. Clint Hill confirmed it.
Palamara is not a reliable source.

> "One of the earliest and arguably most influential (to this day)
> misrepresentation of JFK's relationship to the Secret Service, and in
> particular to agents on his various details, can be found in "Death of a
> President," by William Manchester. One passage in particular exemplifies
> the lengths to which "respected" historians such as Manchester have gone,
> knowingly or otherwise, to falsify the record.
>
>
> "Kennedy grew weary of seeing bodyguards roosting behind him every time he
> turned around, and in Tampa on November 18 (1963), just four days before
> his death, he dryly asked Agent Floyd Boring to 'keep those Ivy League
> charlatans off the back of the car.' Boring wasn't offended. There had
> been no animosity in the remark." (1988 Harper & Row/Perennial Library
> edition, pp. 37-38)
>

You don't cite the name of the book.
You don't have it, do you?

> When asked to comment on the record about that portion of "Death of a
> President," Boring said that the statement attributed to him by Manchester
> is, to say the least, inaccurate. "He quotes me?" Boring asked
> incredulously. "I never told him (that JFK ordered agents off the
> limousine). (JFK) was a very nice man, never interfered with us at all."
> Indeed, Boring stated that he was not interviewed by Manchester-- a fact
> that is confirmed by the book's source notes."
>

Boring related the story in interviews on TV.

> From: http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/limo.html
>
> It may be useful to read the notes at the top of that link that were
> written by Vince Palamara. One of the most knowledgeable people about the
> Secret Service during 1963 and after.

> Least.

> Chris
>

[Anthony Marsh]

Oh, you mean like having 2 SS agents in the car? Can't you see that they
did? Did it do any good? NO.

> killing JFK from the top of building with a rifle was known to the FBI,
> and they ignored it and didn't pass it along. If you don't believe that,
> I can find the cites and links.
>
> They balanced
>> security concerns against their bosses wishes not to have his bodyguards
>> hovering over him in the motorcade. In Dallas as in other places, when the
>> crowds were closing in they would hop up on the bumper so they could be
>> close by if need be. When the crowds thinned out as they did in DP, theY
>> chose to drop back to the Queen Mary.
>>
>
>
> It's been shown that JFK didn't issue orders for the SS agents to stay
> away from the limo. That's a phony story that got started. When you see
> the 'stand down' video, there's no doubt that the 2 agents are ORDERED to
> come back to the Queen Mary and they didn't "choose to drop back on their
> own":
>

False. We can see one go back to the limo as they normally do. The other
was assigned to Love Field.
You also don't point out that there was no room left in the Queen Mary
because 2 Kennedy aides were riding in it, thus kicking out the WH
photographer.

[Anthony Marsh]

Wrong. There was no order to stand down.

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSXQYvm57YM
>
> Chris
>

[bigdog]

Hardly an expert opinion. Merely an observation that films and photos of
other motorcades in other cities showed that sometimes the agents road the
bumper and sometimes they fell back to the follow up car. The agents
themselves had said that while JFK never ordered the agents not to ride
the bumper, he discouraged them from making a habit about it while leaving
it to there judgement when they felt they needed to move in close.

> Milteer's comment about
> killing JFK from the top of building with a rifle was known to the FBI,
> and they ignored it and didn't pass it along. If you don't believe that,
> I can find the cites and links.
>

JFK made pretty much the same comment. Do you think he was in on the plot
too. It was hardly a secret that JFK had a fondness for being seen up
close and personal by the public in slow moving open top cars. It doesn't
take a genius to figure out that made him vulnerable to a sniper firing
from a tall building.

As JFK himself observed, if someone wanted to take a shot at him from a
tall building while riding in a motorcade, there wasn't a lot anybody
could do about it. The assassination wasn't due to any failing by the SS.
JFK's fondness for motorcades made him vulnerable to a sniper from a tall
building. He knew the risks and accepted them for political reasons. He
gambled with his life and lost. He lost because one of his motorcades
crossed paths with a sociopath with a rifle.

[slats]

Anthony Marsh <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in
news:57ed3e58$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu:

>> I'm talking about Kennedy's normal SS detail. Jackie rarely
>> accompanied her husband on domestic political trips. Rarer still was
>> the both of them riding in an open limousine. Therefore, the Texas
>> trip was an anomoly. Clint Hill, super protective of her, either
>> didn't receive Kennedy's instructions regarding agents riding the
>> bumper or he didn't care.
>>
>
> He knew. He violated it. He crouched down.

Crouching down makes him invisible to JFK? LOL.

Hill was not a tall man. It's quite possible that his arms were not long
enough to reach the hand grips from a standing position, hence the need to
crouch.

[bigdog]

If it looks that way it's because it is the way JFK wanted it. He liked
motorcades in open top cars. He didn't like his agents hovering over him.
That made him a sitting duck for anyone wanting to take a shot at him.

[mainframetech]

On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 10:51:38 PM UTC-4, stevemg...@yahoo.com wrote:

As an addendum to that comment, the video below shows that the
limousine brake came on briefly when the shots rang out. And just as the
final kill shot struck. It may have been instrumental in the success of
the murder. The driver had to have been trained to drive fast out of any
trouble to get away from any ambush or trap, yet he braked and almost came
to a stop as per Bobby Hargis, the motorcycle cop that was pacing the limo
on the left rear:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=La1hd3IyzfI

Watch the video all the way through to se the brake light come on, and
to hear Hargis describe the slow down.

Chris

[mainframetech]

Not EVERY SS agent was part of the plot. But I believe a few were.
Possibly Kellerman and Greer, and maybe others.

Chris

[mainframetech]

WRONG! The SS agents sat on the platforms or stood as the limo was
going to pick up speed. Otherwise at times they walked alongside to stop
someone running out from the crowd to the limo.

DVP was in error, because Lawton couldn't be the guy that was 'stood
down' since Lawton's report for 11/22/63 (CE2554) was that he stayed at
the airport and prepared for the return to the planes. That included his
going to lunch and all this while the limo was on it's way along the
Dallas streets. While at the airport he got the word that JFK had been
shot. So the blind was leading the blind this time.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 2:19:41 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 4:58:06 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 3:49:56 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
> > > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:13:14 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> > > > > CHRIS/FRAME SAID:
> > > > >
> > > > > So where's the response to my list of photos with SS men on and around the
> > > > > limousine?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
> > > > >
> > > > > Here (for the second time)....
> > > > >
> > > > > http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That is a link to your website. I'm not here to have to go there every
> > > > time you want to say something to me, and I'm not here to up your hit
> > > > count wither. If you have something to answer my proof, please say it
> > > > here. If you've said something elsewhere, copying and pasting isn't too
> > > > tedious task.
> > > >
> > >
> > > This from a guy who has made it a habit of posting links to every kook
> > > website he can find and pretend that by itself proves his point.
> > >
> >
> >
> > WRONG as usual! You apparently forgot that the only websites that will
> > post information on conspiracy are those that aren't locked into the WCR.
> > But you're fully capable of making commentary about the item that I post a
> > link to if you dare.
> >
>

> On numerous occasions you have chastised me for not visiting your websites
> even though they were ones you had posted links to previously and I had
> already checked them out. Now you turn around and tell DVP you can't be
> bothered to look at websites he has posted. Once again your double
> standards are on display for all to see.
>

WRONG as usual! You did your usual jumping in with no information and
made the expected mistake. I've had discussions with DVP in the past
about his using McAdams' forum to recruit members for his own website.
He needs hits on his site, and he comes here every now and then and thinks
up ways to get folks to go hit on his website. I've complained about it
in the past, and I won't increase his hit count just because he posts a
link to it. Though I must comment that his website and his logic are
completely like many LN stuff where there is NO consideration for evidence
contrary to the WCR, like you often prove.

DVP has often come her and made comments that I find completely without
backing, and an LN attitude that needs adjusting. I sometimes will do
that adjusting. And of course, he's unable to defend himself and the
proof of that is that YOU have to step in often to defend him when he runs
away. And here you are again.

> > > > Where it stands now: You pointed out that the limo wasn't guarded by
> > > > SS very often and presented a photo of the limo unguarded. I then put up
> > > > may photos of SS agents all over the limo with JFK in it, and they were on
> > > > it or walking beside it too.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Which establishes that sometimes the SS rode the bumper and sometimes they
> > > did not. That pretty much shoots down your claim there was a stand down in
> > > Dallas when we have plenty of photographic proof that it was not at all
> > > uncommon for the agents not be riding the bumper. There was nothing unique
> > > about the measures taken in Dallas.
> > >
> >
> >
> > You've proven nothing, and your name isn't DVP, who apparently isn't
> > capable of defending himself and needs you to step in for him.
>

> He's more than capable of defending himself with no help from me. This is
> a public forum and anyone is free to join in any conversation. You have
> done so yourself on countless occasions. Another example of your double
> standards.
>

I have no standard that says you can't jump in. some of your wildest
mistakes are from your jumping in. I relish those times so that I can
correct you yet again. I commented though that you have to jump in to
defend him. That says nothing about you not being able to. I'm aware of
the rules. Think that through for a change before you jump.

> > Whether
> > anyone was on the step or not has nothing to do with the fact that there
> > was a stand down and it was obvious from the video.
>

> Oh, it's obvious. I guess saying that relieves you of any burden to actual
> demonstrate that claim.
>

Think that comment through. The 'Stand down' video is the "actual
demonstration" that a 'stand down' occurred. And one of the agents that
was stood down was frustrated and didn't understand why he was pulled back
from the position that most needed to be filled. Which was then later
helpful in the murder of JFK.

> > We're discussing a
> > town where there were many JFK haters, yet there was a stand down of the
> > men who would ride the platforms, which may have reduced the chances of
> > JFK being killed.
> >
>

> There was no stand down in Dallas and JFK haters were in every town JFK
> visited. There was nothing unique about Dallas other than LHO working in a
> building that the motorcade would pass by.
>

How clever of you to forget that the FBI and the SS had information
that Milteer had said there would be killing of JFK from an office
building with a rifle IN DALLAS.

> >
> >
> > > > As well, you've erased the discussion we were having in this thread.
> > > > So where is it? Were you afraid that others would see it?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Why would anyone be afraid or your silly arguments?
> >
> >
> > WRONG! I didn't say afraid of my arguments, but afraid of others
> > seeing them. Think it through!
> >
>

> Oh, that's a whole lot different. <chuckle>

You seem not to have the ability to make fine distinctions. Practice
makes perfect.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 10:50:56 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> WAS THE BACK OF JFK'S HEAD BLACKED OUT?....
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-895.html

Absolutely. No need to go to DVP's website to find that out. He'll
tell you his opinion anyway, and not anything from scientific examination.
Here we have an example of the opposing viewpoint, where over 40 witnesses
saw the large hole in the BOH of JFK. Yet the 'leaked' autopsy photos
show no damage to the BOH at all. Testimony to the alteration of the
'leaked' photos. The Z-film had to be blacked out at that point at the
BOH because it had to fit the autopsy changes that were made to the body
and not show the massive damage at the BOH.

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/05/01/zapruder-frame-343-new-proof-of-blowout-at-back-of-jfks-head/


Chris

[mainframetech]

On Thursday, September 29, 2016 at 2:50:57 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 28, 2016 at 4:58:06 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> > On Tuesday, September 27, 2016 at 3:49:56 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
> > > On Monday, September 26, 2016 at 8:12:03 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, September 25, 2016 at 10:13:14 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> > > > > CHRIS/FRAME SAID:
> > > > >
> > > > > So where's the response to my list of photos with SS men on and around the
> > > > > limousine?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
> > > > >
> > > > > Here (for the second time)....
> > > > >
> > > > > http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That is a link to your website. I'm not here to have to go there every
> > > > time you want to say something to me, and I'm not here to up your hit
> > > > count wither. If you have something to answer my proof, please say it
> > > > here. If you've said something elsewhere, copying and pasting isn't too
> > > > tedious task.
> > > >
> > >
> > > This from a guy who has made it a habit of posting links to every kook
> > > website he can find and pretend that by itself proves his point.
> > >
> >
> >
> > WRONG as usual! You apparently forgot that the only websites that will
> > post information on conspiracy are those that aren't locked into the WCR.
> > But you're fully capable of making commentary about the item that I post a
> > link to if you dare.
> >
> >
> >

> > > > Where it stands now: You pointed out that the limo wasn't guarded by
> > > > SS very often and presented a photo of the limo unguarded. I then put up
> > > > may photos of SS agents all over the limo with JFK in it, and they were on
> > > > it or walking beside it too.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Which establishes that sometimes the SS rode the bumper and sometimes they
> > > did not. That pretty much shoots down your claim there was a stand down in
> > > Dallas when we have plenty of photographic proof that it was not at all
> > > uncommon for the agents not be riding the bumper. There was nothing unique
> > > about the measures taken in Dallas.
> > >
> >
> >
> > You've proven nothing, and your name isn't DVP, who apparently isn't

> > capable of defending himself and needs you to step in for him. Whether

> > anyone was on the step or not has nothing to do with the fact that there

> > was a stand down and it was obvious from the video. We're discussing a

> > town where there were many JFK haters, yet there was a stand down of the
> > men who would ride the platforms, which may have reduced the chances of
> > JFK being killed.
> >
> >
> >

> > > > As well, you've erased the discussion we were having in this thread.
> > > > So where is it? Were you afraid that others would see it?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Why would anyone be afraid or your silly arguments?
> >
> >
> > WRONG! I didn't say afraid of my arguments, but afraid of others
> > seeing them. Think it through!
> >

> > Chris
>
> Chris,
>
> Why do you ignore the fact that the agent who is shrugging his shoulders
> at Love Field (Donald Lawton) was *never assigned to be part of the
> motorcade* that day?
>
> Lawton's assignment on 11/22/63 was "to remain at the airport to effect
> security for the President's departure" (a direct quote from Lawton's
> 11/30/63 report; see CE2554).
>

Ah, there you are! How strange it is that a guy that was assigned to
stay at the airport is ordered to get into the Queen Mary instead of being
ordered to stay at the airport as per the original orders!

Now, let's correct the NEW errors you've made. First, Lawton couldn't
have been the guy that tried to guard the president and his limousine and
was ordered back to the Queen Mary. I read the document you pointed to
(CE2554) and Lawton's report had nothing to do with him and the limousine.
He described his actions as exactly as he was supposed to do, stay at the
airport and guard the return to the planes. He also went to lunch in that
time when the limousine and the Queen Mary were driving along. He was
also doing his job when the word came to them that JFK had been shot, so
second, Lawton wasn't the guy who was ordered to 'stand down'. Third,
Lawton's report wasn't dated 11/30.63, it was dated 11/22/63.

> All of this material concerning Lawton and Rybka (and lots more) is laid
> out in detail at my webpage on this matter (the one Chris/Frame refuses to
> look at). But here it is again anyway, just in case Chris ever wants to
> know what the facts are....
>
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html

No need. I've corrected the mistakes above in trying to get me to
increase the hit points of the website.

Generally when someone wants to make a point here, they state their
point and then supply cites and links to back the point up with real data.
But when the main purpose is to increase hits on another website, I'm less
interested. There are plenty of neutral places to find the same backup.
Including document CE2554. I looked it up in the 'history matters'
website.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

Can't you see the video? He WAS on foot. So what? He stayed on foot. So
what?

> have either been riding the bumper of the President's limo or been on the
> Queen Mary. Does anyone think he was suppose to be on foot all the way
> from Love Field to DP.
>
>

They don't ride on the bumper when it is parked. They were trained to jump
onto the running boards of the SS car when the limo pulls away. Not hard
to do, but it does take practice.

You are confusing running boards with rear bumper.

They built running boards for the Presidential limo, but they were too
dangerous to use.

http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/KN-C18065.jpg

[Anthony Marsh]

Brilliant. And wrong.

> alongside the limo? Not just to block/obscure a shot but being able to
> respond more quickly to an attempt? Yes, I'm guessing here.
>

The SS agent run or walk next to the limo to keep people from
dangerously running up to the limo, as some people have done.

http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/176.+JFK+IN+MIAMI,+FLORIDA+(11-18-63).jpg

> Hill has stated in several interviews that since they were at the end of
> the motorcade route/visit - the crowds were thinning and they were headed
> for the highway - no one would ride on the bumper anyway since the limo
> would be traveling too fast.
>

Hill did not STAND on the rear bumper.
How fast do you think they planned to drive on the Stemmons Freeway?
90 Miles an hour?
I don't know the official name of your argument.
I just call it silly.
Here is an open question for anyone. Before Dallas how fast was the
fastest that the limo went with SS agents standing up on the back bumper?
Photos? Films?

> Oswald - or the shooter - was in a perfect position. It's not hard to
> understand why people could think there was a conspiracy. It does seem to
> look like JFK was deliberately driven to his death.
>

Jeez, it's not hard to see why the majority of the public thought it was
a conspiracy the moment the shots were fired.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/29/2016 10:50 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
> WAS THE BACK OF JFK'S HEAD BLACKED OUT?....
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-895.html
>

No. No shoe polish was used to prepare the body for burial.
Or do you mean some random photo was blacked out? Sure, so what?
Read Pictures of the Pain.
The preferred method is what the DPD did, just scratch out that area on
the print.
Painting is also fun.

[Bud]

You can explain it to them and explain it to them and they will always
gallop towards the destination they are desperate to believe is true.

Like every single conspiracy hobbyist issue, this one has gone
absolutely nowhere because there was never anywhere for it to go.

[mainframetech]

WRONG! You need to do some research. Maybe check with Vince Palamara
and see what he thinks of your guesses.

> > Milteer's comment about
> > killing JFK from the top of building with a rifle was known to the FBI,
> > and they ignored it and didn't pass it along. If you don't believe that,
> > I can find the cites and links.
> >
>
> JFK made pretty much the same comment. Do you think he was in on the plot
> too. It was hardly a secret that JFK had a fondness for being seen up
> close and personal by the public in slow moving open top cars. It doesn't
> take a genius to figure out that made him vulnerable to a sniper firing
> from a tall building.
>

Interesting. Where did you hear that JFK had that fondness? Please
supply cites and links because I don't believe you.

Please supply cites and links for JFK's fondness for open top
motorcades. When a person makes a specific threat as Milteer did, they
want to question him as to what he might know, or are you painting the SS
as dummies?

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

On 9/30/2016 3:44 PM, slats wrote:
> Anthony Marsh <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in
> news:57ed3e58$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu:
>
>>> I'm talking about Kennedy's normal SS detail. Jackie rarely
>>> accompanied her husband on domestic political trips. Rarer still was
>>> the both of them riding in an open limousine. Therefore, the Texas
>>> trip was an anomoly. Clint Hill, super protective of her, either
>>> didn't receive Kennedy's instructions regarding agents riding the
>>> bumper or he didn't care.
>>>
>>
>> He knew. He violated it. He crouched down.
>
> Crouching down makes him invisible to JFK? LOL.
>

Silly. I didn't say invisible to JFK. WTF!
He would not block the public's view of JFK. unless you think there was
a spectator in the storm drains.

> Hill was not a tall man. It's quite possible that his arms were not long
> enough to reach the hand grips from a standing position, hence the need to
> crouch.
>

No silly. He had stood up at other times. He was trying to comply
somewhat with JFK's wishes.
I very much resent your personal attacks on our SS agents.

[Anthony Marsh]

That's not a nice way to talk about the CIA.

[David Von Pein]

CHRIS/FRAME SAID:

DVP was in error, because Lawton couldn't be the guy that was 'stood down'
since Lawton's report for 11/22/63 (CE2554) was that he stayed at the
airport and prepared for the return to the planes.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Chris,

Even your hero, Vince Palamara, has conceded that "Shrugging Man" is
Donald Lawton.

You seem to think that just because Lawton augmented ran alongside the
limo for a few seconds, that must mean he HAD to be part of the
"motorcade" crew that day. Right? But why would you think such a thing?

Also: according to Clint Hill (via the 2010 C-Span clip provided below),
the shrugging agent's identity was confirmed as Don Lawton....

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c3997800/shrugging-secret-service-agent-love-field-identified

[David Von Pein]

CHRIS INCORRECTLY SAID:

Lawton's report wasn't dated 11/30.63, it was dated 11/22/63.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

No, it wasn't. Lawton's report is clearly dated Nov. 30th. You're looking
at the wrong part of CE2554. The 11/22 date on the right is not connected
to Lawton's report. That 11/22 date is referring to another agent's
report....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0408b.htm

[mainframetech]

Please supply cites and links for that statement. I don't believe it.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

No, he wasn't. You know nothing about that incident.

[Anthony Marsh]

"Sat on the platforms?" SHow me the pictures which explain what you are
trying to say. Maybe you got confused by perspective.

> going to pick up speed. Otherwise at times they walked alongside to stop
> someone running out from the crowd to the limo.
>

Did you see the photos I posted?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 10/1/2016 12:13 AM, mainframetech wrote:

Oh, goody, goody. Let's start the driver did it thread again.
Tell me again the caliber of his pistol.
Did that make your quarter inch bullet hole?
So, you'd have to claim it was a .25 caliber?

> Chris
>

[Anthony Marsh]

No, it doesn't. You are confused.

> final kill shot struck. It may have been instrumental in the success of
> the murder. The driver had to have been trained to drive fast out of any
> trouble to get away from any ambush or trap, yet he braked and almost came
> to a stop as per Bobby Hargis, the motorcycle cop that was pacing the limo
> on the left rear:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=La1hd3IyzfI
>
> Watch the video all the way through to se the brake light come on, and
> to hear Hargis describe the slow down.
>

You can't have just one brake light come on. BOTH brake lights would
have to come on at the same time.

> Chris
>

[Anthony Marsh]

Jeez, how did you figure that out all by yourself. Why did they build
that convertible just for him and why did he order the bubble top taken
off? When was the last motorcade that you saw with the President inside
an armored car?
Even Reagan wanted a sun roof so that he could stand up during the
motorcade.

http://theastrocowboy.com/Reagan81/20.jpg

[stevemg...@yahoo.com]

Y'know, you're just hopeless, utterly hopeless.

I give up.

[bigdog]

If Lawton was supposed to accompany the limo all the way, why would he
have started out on foot. Why wouldn't he be on the bumper to start.
Common sense should tell you that but that has never been your strong
suit.

> DVP was in error, because Lawton couldn't be the guy that was 'stood
> down' since Lawton's report for 11/22/63 (CE2554) was that he stayed at
> the airport and prepared for the return to the planes. That included his
> going to lunch and all this while the limo was on it's way along the
> Dallas streets. While at the airport he got the word that JFK had been
> shot. So the blind was leading the blind this time.
>

You essentially said the same thing DVP said. Lawton's job was airport
security. What in the tape tells you that is not Lawton who was on foot
and then stopped and turned around? That agent clearly had no plans to
accompany the limo into town.

[bigdog]

It's in the WCR. Page 29 of the WCR. Kenny O'Donnell said, "we had a
motorcade wherever we went,". If JFK didn't like motorcades, why would
they have a motorcade wherever they went. Why do we have so many pictures
of so many motorcades in so many cities in which JFK was riding in a slow
moving open top car. He was the boss. If he didn't like motorcades, they
wouldn't have done motorcades.

I just did.

> When a person makes a specific threat as Milteer did, they
> want to question him as to what he might know, or are you painting the SS
> as dummies?
>

People make threats against the President all the time. Presidents all
have lots of enemies. Since JFK was killed, there have been 3 overt
attempts to kill a President as well as two candidates. In addition a
number of plots have been thwarted before the attempt was made.

[slats]

Anthony Marsh <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in

news:57eef9d9$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu:

> On 9/30/2016 3:44 PM, slats wrote:
>> Anthony Marsh <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in
>> news:57ed3e58$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu:
>>
>>>> I'm talking about Kennedy's normal SS detail. Jackie rarely
>>>> accompanied her husband on domestic political trips. Rarer still
>>>> was the both of them riding in an open limousine. Therefore, the
>>>> Texas trip was an anomoly. Clint Hill, super protective of her,
>>>> either didn't receive Kennedy's instructions regarding agents
>>>> riding the bumper or he didn't care.
>>>>
>>>
>>> He knew. He violated it. He crouched down.
>>
>> Crouching down makes him invisible to JFK? LOL.
>>
>
> Silly. I didn't say invisible to JFK. WTF!
> He would not block the public's view of JFK. unless you think there
> was a spectator in the storm drains.

You clearly implied that he crouched so that JFK wouldn't notice him
violating his order.

>> Hill was not a tall man. It's quite possible that his arms were not
>> long enough to reach the hand grips from a standing position, hence
>> the need to crouch.
>>
>
> No silly. He had stood up at other times. He was trying to comply
> somewhat with JFK's wishes.
> I very much resent your personal attacks on our SS agents.

First you said he violated the order, now you say he tried to comply.
Make up your mind.

[bigdog]

Reality and what you believe rarely cross paths.

Ask yourself a simple question. If JFK didn't like doing motorcades, why
did he choose to do so many motorcades? As Kenny O'Donnell said, they had
a motorcade wherever they went. You do know that as POTUS, JFK was top dog
in the exectutive branch. Nobody could force him to do anything he didn't
want to do. He did a lot of motorcades because he enjoyed doing
motorcades.

[mainframetech]

My apologies, you're correct. The left side of the page is the report
of Lawton. It is very slim and says nothing except that he remained at
the airport as per his instructions, and there was absolutely nothing
there about going with the JFK limo and then being ordered into the
following SS car in the motorcade.

All my other statements above in the previous post remain correct.

Chris