Kennedy Did Not Like Secret Service Agents Riding on the Rear of the Limo

[John McAdams]

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html#Excerpt-From-December-1963-Secret-Service-Report

.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[Anthony Marsh]

Please be polite and tell us whose blog you are pointing to when you post
a clickable link. I don't want to accidentally click on a Cinque link. And
you don't want kids accidentally clicking on a pornography Web site. And
most people are afraid to click on a conspiracy Web site, because the NSA
adds demerits to that person's terrorist profile every time they visit a
conspiracy Web site.

[OHLeeRedux]

Clint Hill can be seen in several films squatting down when he is riding
on the rear step of the presidential limo, obviously so JFK cannot see him
there.

[Mitch Todd]

This is one of the blurbs off of Lancer for Vince's "Agents Go on Record"
essay:

'Behn (interviewed three times on 9/27/92) -- "I don't remember Kennedy
ever saying that he didn't want anybody on the back of his car. I think if
you watch the newsreel pictures and whatnot, you'll find agents on there
from time to time."'

"from time to time." In other words, Behn is saying that the SS agents
generally stayed off of the limo.




"mainframetech" wrote in message
news:51084ab4-9a70-4317...@googlegroups.com...

On Friday, June 6, 2014 10:14:22 AM UTC-4, John McAdams wrote:
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html#Excerpt-From-December-1963-Secret-Service-Report

Yep. Just as I said, the word came down from Floyd Boring, but the
other agents had said that word hadn't gotten to them and DFK hadn't said
it before. The place where I pointed to was a poll taken up by Palamara
from the SS agents themselves:

"(EDITOR'S NOTE: The following news story, by historian and researcher
Vincent M. Palamara, sets the record straight regarding the long-repeated
falsehood that President John F. Kennedy was somehow responsible for his
own assassination because he ordered Secret Service agents off his open
car and otherwise fatally undermined the performance of his bodyguards.
Palamara, widely recognized as the preeminent expert on Secret Service
personnel and procedures during the Kennedy era, has secured the first
on-the-record comments from agents in the presidential detail of November
22, 1963 and other primary sources.)"

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

There follows a list of agents that were polled and told Palamara that
they never heard JFK try to get them off the platforms. However, The SS
chief was Rowley at the time of the murder, and he had issued a memo to a
lawyer for the WC that backed up a limousine representative from Ford
named Vaughn Ferguson, and they both made the exact same mistake in their
memos of Dec. 18th to cover up the cleaning up of the limo by sending it
to Rouge Michigan. This effort to cover up by Rowley suggests that he may
have issued something to cover for this problem too.

Chris

[mainframetech]

[mainframetech]

On Friday, June 6, 2014 10:14:22 AM UTC-4, John McAdams wrote:
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html#Excerpt-From-December-1963-Secret-Service-Report
>
>
>

> .John


Most JFK in limousine pictures are from the day of the murder, however, here are a few showing JFK in the limo with the SS riding on the platforms. JFK obviously didn't kick them off those days. And remember that a poll of SS agents came up with them, saying JFK never issued orders for them to stay off the platforms.

http://i61.photobucket.com/albums/h52/Tiktaalik/Tommy_Eure_33.jpg
http://prn.fm/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/imgres-22.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_ab5FyRk39jk/TNw5P5kzh5I/AAAAAAAABac/hWIdVjcDtnc/S1600-R/PIC_3837.JPG
http://lotpro.com/blogphotos/Presidential%20Rides/tn_JFK%20Limousine.jpg

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Saturday, June 7, 2014 1:21:58 AM UTC-4, Mitch Todd wrote:
> This is one of the blurbs off of Lancer for Vince's "Agents Go on Record"
>
> essay:
>
>
>
> 'Behn (interviewed three times on 9/27/92) -- "I don't remember Kennedy
>
> ever saying that he didn't want anybody on the back of his car. I think if
>
> you watch the newsreel pictures and whatnot, you'll find agents on there
>
> from time to time."'
>
>
>
> "from time to time." In other words, Behn is saying that the SS agents
>
> generally stayed off of the limo.
>
>

So that item was selected out of the quotes of many SS agents saying that JFK never told them to stay off the platforms. Here's the next item from the same article:

"A photo from the Tampa Tribune of November 19, 1963 -- three days before the assassination -- clearly supports Behn's contention. It depicts agents Donald Lawton and Charles Zboril on the rear of JFK's limousine in both urban and suburban areas, during a politically significant, high-visibility presidential visit to Florida."

Also asking Kinney if he was ever ordered off the limousine platforms:

"Kinney (interviewed on 10/19/92, 3/5/94, 4/15/94) -- "Absolutely, positively no. He (JFK) had nothing to do with that, no, never ... President Kennedy was one of the easiest presidents to protect ... ninety nine percent of the agents would agree."

[bigdog]

On Saturday, June 7, 2014 1:21:58 AM UTC-4, Mitch Todd wrote:

> This is one of the blurbs off of Lancer for Vince's "Agents Go on Record"
>
> essay:
>
>
>
> 'Behn (interviewed three times on 9/27/92) -- "I don't remember Kennedy
>
> ever saying that he didn't want anybody on the back of his car. I think if
>
> you watch the newsreel pictures and whatnot, you'll find agents on there
>
> from time to time."'
>
>
>
> "from time to time." In other words, Behn is saying that the SS agents
>
> generally stayed off of the limo.
>

Precisely. The SS agents concern was the protection of the POTUS. Had it been their call, I'm sure they would have been riding the bumber all the time. JFK's primary concern was politics. That dictated they not be on the bumper, so most of the time, politics trumped safety.

[bigdog]

The obvious question is, "If JFK didn't order or at least strongly suggest the SS agents not ride the bumper, why wouldn't they have been there all the time? Why would they ever not be in posiition to immediately move to protect him? The answer is as obvious as the question.

[mainframetech]

On Saturday, June 7, 2014 9:05:05 AM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
> The obvious question is, "If JFK didn't order or at least strongly suggest the SS agents not ride the bumper, why wouldn't they have been there all the time? Why would they ever not be in posiition to immediately move to protect him? The answer is as obvious as the question.

You need a certain freedom of mind to handle questions like that.
There are plenty of reasons for the SS not to have men on the platforms.
Safety for one, if they plan to go fast through certain areas, they may
want to put the agents in the following car as they often did. They may
have felt that the area they were going through was vey safe and didn't
need someone on the platforms every minute. There might not have been
enough agents one day for 2 of them to be assigned to the platforms.
Many reasons. Again, we have the statements of many agents that JFK NEVER
interfered in how they protected him. It was strictly up to them.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Saturday, June 7, 2014 9:04:39 AM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
> On Saturday, June 7, 2014 1:21:58 AM UTC-4, Mitch Todd wrote:
>
> > This is one of the blurbs off of Lancer for Vince's "Agents Go on Record"
>
> >
>
> > essay:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > 'Behn (interviewed three times on 9/27/92) -- "I don't remember Kennedy
>
> >
>
> > ever saying that he didn't want anybody on the back of his car. I think if
>
> >
>
> > you watch the newsreel pictures and whatnot, you'll find agents on there
>
> >
>
> > from time to time."'
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > "from time to time." In other words, Behn is saying that the SS agents
>
> >
>
> > generally stayed off of the limo.
>

Nope, that gimmick won't work. From 'time to time' could be every other
day for all we know. There were times that they felt it was more useful
and safer to have someone on those platforms, and that was a decision of
the SS, NOT of JFK. The statement made about talking to most of the SS
agents over the years was

"PRESIDENT KENNEDY WAS A VERY NICE MAN AND, AS MANY AGENTS TOLD ME (IN
WRITING AND ON TAPE), HE *NEVER* INTERFERED WITH THEIR ACTIONS!" Comment
by Vince Palamara, most knowledgeable of the Secret Service researchers.

From: http://vincepalamara.blogspot.com/


> >
>
> Precisely. The SS agents concern was the protection of the POTUS. Had it been their call, I'm sure they would have been riding the bumber all the time. JFK's primary concern was politics. That dictated they not be on the bumper, so most of the time, politics trumped safety.

The SS agents made it clear that JFK never interfered with their plans
for his safety. It jars when someone who say otherwise comes along.
Floyd Boring should be investigated. Listen to the first thing in his
ARRB testimony:

"Mr Boring said he was glad to talk to us if we wanted him to but that "I
didn't have anything to do with it, and I don't know anything.""

Doesn't sound right to me.

Chris

[David Von Pein]

MR. SPECTER -- "What are the standard regulations and practices, if any,
governing such an action on your part?"

MR. HILL -- "It is left to the agent's discretion more or less to move to
that particular position when he feels that there is a danger to the
President, to place himself as close to the President--or the First Lady
as my case was--as possible, which I did."

MR. SPECTER -- "Are those practices specified in any written documents of
the Secret Service?"

MR. HILL -- "No, they are not."

MR. SPECTER -- "Now, had there been any instruction or comment about your
performance of that type of a duty with respect to anything that President
Kennedy himself had said in the period immediately preceding the trip to
Texas?"

MR. HILL -- "Yes, sir; there was. The preceding Monday, the President was
on a trip in Tampa, Florida, and he requested that the agents not ride on
either of those two steps."

MR. SPECTER -- "And to whom did the President make that request?"

MR. HILL -- "Assistant Special Agent in Charge Boring."

[David Von Pein]

The whole issue of "Agents On The Bumper" is a moot one anyway, because
there are dozens of photos showing JFK riding in motorcades prior to 11/22
when no SS agents are anywhere near the bumper of SS-100-X (regardless of
any preferences uttered by JFK or not). Such as the nine examples provided
on the webpage below (seven of which involve SS-100-X and two featuring a
Cadillac limo which has no built-in steps; but even in those two examples,
there's no SS agents walking alongside the car)....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html#Excerpt-From-December-1963-Secret-Service-Report

Ergo....11/22/63 was no different whatsoever than any other pre-Nov. 22
motorcade with respect to agents riding the bumpers. They would ride the
bumpers only AS NEEDED (via Clint Hill's testimony quoted in my previous
post).

For some reason, many CTers just cannot seem to grasp that basic fact.

[David Von Pein]

RELATED DISCUSSION AT AMAZON:

http://www.amazon.com/forum/history/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx33HXI3XVZDC8G&cdMsgID=Mx295YM3DE22O9N&cdMsgNo=1191&cdPage=48&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=TxBBN5SVEIZH59#Mx295YM3DE22O9N

DVP SAID:

Yes, Clint Hill's version of JFK's request that the SS agents stay off the
bumpers is hearsay. It definitely is JUST that---hearsay. And evidently
it's at least DOUBLE hearsay (since Hill didn't get the information
directly from Floyd Boring himself). And I don't deny it's DOUBLE HEARSAY.

However, it's my opinion that JFK probably *DID* make such a casual
request of the Secret Service agents in 1963. And there are two reasons
why I believe that:

1.) I don't think the person from whom Clint Hill received his information
on this matter just MADE UP the whole thing. That's kind of silly to
believe that, IMO.

2.) Such a request to keep the agents off of the car just SOUNDS like
something President Kennedy might very well have done. It fits JFK's
character and overall style. We know that JFK liked to mingle with crowds,
and he liked for the crowds to be able to see him and be near him (so he
could shake their hands). And the SS agents being all over the car (not
necessarily just the bumpers, but flanking the car on the sides as well)
is *probably* something that John F. Kennedy didn't particularly care for
very much.

Kennedy knew he had to let them do their job, of course. But in the
"different world" that existed when JFK was President (prior to 11/22/63,
that is, which would have been prior to the biggest lesson of them all
being learned by the United Stated Secret Service--which is: We cannot let
the President drive around amongst heavy crowds in an open-top
convertible), a request for the SS agents to "pull back" a little bit more
(so to speak), particularly since we know how JFK felt about being
accessible to the public, does indeed sound like a request that might very
well have come from the lips of John F. Kennedy in 1963.

I'm sure many people completely disagree with both of my points above. But
so be it. Those are things I believe, and neither one is totally out of
the bounds of reason or logic or common sense.

But allow me to stress once again (as I did in a prior post) -- Regardless
of whether JFK made any such request of the Secret Service or not, it
DOESN'T MATTER ONE SINGLE BIT. And here's why....

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

[David Von Pein]

Here's something else I found in the Secret Service report.....

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yj0p1b9717c/U5QBjYG0IMI/AAAAAAAA0uQ/sP8dkVjf5nA/s1600/Excerpt-From-12-18-63-Secret-Service-Report-Appendix-A-Pages-18-19.png

The above excerpt was taken from this source....
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10404&relPageId=69

[David Von Pein]

More goodies from the often-overlooked 12/18/63 Secret Service
Assassination Report....

On pages 12 and 13 of that SS Report, it states (plain as day) that the
Secret Service was NOT in the habit of checking every building and every
window along motorcade routes in 1963, shattering yet another myth that we
repeatedly hear from conspiracy theorists like Fletcher Prouty and Vince
Palamara:

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=327678

[mainframetech]

As DVP reminds us, Clint Hill testified that "It is left to the agent's

discretion more or less to move to that particular position when he feels

that there is a danger to the President..." So there will be times they
ride on the platforms and times they won't. Looking at the many photos
one can find many that show the agents riding the platforms as well times
they are not, just as Clint Hill stated.

Thanks, DVP.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Saturday, June 7, 2014 11:29:51 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> MR. SPECTER -- "What are the standard regulations and practices, if any,
>
> governing such an action on your part?"
>
>
>

> MR. HILL -- "It is left to the agent's discretion more or less to move to

>
> that particular position when he feels that there is a danger to the
>

> President, to place himself as close to the President--or the First Lady
>
> as my case was--as possible, which I did."
>
>
>
> MR. SPECTER -- "Are those practices specified in any written documents of
>
> the Secret Service?"
>
>
>
> MR. HILL -- "No, they are not."
>
>
>
> MR. SPECTER -- "Now, had there been any instruction or comment about your
>
> performance of that type of a duty with respect to anything that President
>
> Kennedy himself had said in the period immediately preceding the trip to
>
> Texas?"
>
>
>
> MR. HILL -- "Yes, sir; there was. The preceding Monday, the President was
>
> on a trip in Tampa, Florida, and he requested that the agents not ride on
>
> either of those two steps."
>
>
>
> MR. SPECTER -- "And to whom did the President make that request?"
>
>
>
> MR. HILL -- "Assistant Special Agent in Charge Boring."

Yes, but Boring denied that he had said anything of that sort during his
ARRB testimony. If we could get corroboration that Boring said it, it
would put Boring into a bad position. His comment before the ARRB
interview didn't make him look pure and clean.

Chris

[Mitch Todd]

"mainframetech" wrote in message
news:85720a65-8e08-4583...@googlegroups.com...

The underlying (and more important) question is whether the Secret Service
agents were uncharacteristically kept off of the limo by Unnamed Nefarious
Powers in order to facilitate the assassination. I suspect that Palmara
was hoping that he'd find evidence of the that. Unfortunately, Vince found
out (e.g. Behn) that the agents did not normally glue themselves to the
Limousine, hence the fallback to the "JFK did not order the agents off of
the limo" position.



> "mainframetech" wrote in message

[Bud]

On Sunday, June 8, 2014 10:40:54 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> RELATED DISCUSSION AT AMAZON:
>
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/forum/history/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx33HXI3XVZDC8G&cdMsgID=Mx295YM3DE22O9N&cdMsgNo=1191&cdPage=48&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=TxBBN5SVEIZH59#Mx295YM3DE22O9N
>
>
>
> DVP SAID:
>
>
>
> Yes, Clint Hill's version of JFK's request that the SS agents stay off the
>
> bumpers is hearsay. It definitely is JUST that---hearsay. And evidently
>
> it's at least DOUBLE hearsay (since Hill didn't get the information
>
> directly from Floyd Boring himself). And I don't deny it's DOUBLE HEARSAY.
>
>
>
> However, it's my opinion that JFK probably *DID* make such a casual
>
> request of the Secret Service agents in 1963. And there are two reasons
>
> why I believe that:
>
>
>
> 1.) I don't think the person from whom Clint Hill received his information
>
> on this matter just MADE UP the whole thing. That's kind of silly to
>
> believe that, IMO.
>
>
>
> 2.) Such a request to keep the agents off of the car just SOUNDS like
>
> something President Kennedy might very well have done. It fits JFK's
>
> character and overall style. We know that JFK liked to mingle with crowds,
>
> and he liked for the crowds to be able to see him and be near him (so he
>
> could shake their hands). And the SS agents being all over the car (not
>
> necessarily just the bumpers, but flanking the car on the sides as well)
>
> is *probably* something that John F. Kennedy didn't particularly care for
>
> very much.

Another thing to consider is that they didn`t ride the bumpers much in
many of the cities up North. It would be real slap in the face if they did
it down South, as if southerners couldn`t be trusted.

An Oswald can be in any state in the Union.

[Bud]

Making the whole issue insignificant in ways conspiracy hobbyists can`t
seem to fathom.

>
>
> Thanks, DVP.
>
>
>
> Chris

[news]

Bud <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in
news:2ced0229-9d9d-4e71...@googlegroups.com:

>> But allow me to stress once again (as I did in a prior post) --
>> Regardless
>>
>> of whether JFK made any such request of the Secret Service or not, it
>>
>> DOESN'T MATTER ONE SINGLE BIT. And here's why....
>>
>>
>>
>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html

AFAIK, Tampa was the only time agents rode the bumpers IN the US. It was
much more common on overseas trips.

[Anthony Marsh]

"Uncharacteristically"? Yes, in a way. It was the first time the issue
came up, especially because of the Tampa motorcade just one week prior:

00:35:37 THE PRESIDENT ARRIVED at MacDill air force base in Tampa,
and he helicoptered out to Lopez stadium, and he gave his speech there.
00:35:48 Then we started a motorcade.
00:35:50 The problem was we had 28 miles of motorcade.
00:35:56 I said, "those guys are gonna be worn out, "so I think I'm gonna have them
"ride on the back end of the president's car,
"because we just don't have the manpower " all of a sudden,
I hear over the radio, the president wants the ivy league charlatans to fall
back to the follow-up car, and he politely told everybody,
"we're starting the campaign now, " he said,
"I couldn't get elected dog catcher "
we all of a sudden understood,
but it left a firm command to stay off the back of the car.

> Nefarious Powers in order to facilitate the assassination. I suspect
> that Palmara was hoping that he'd find evidence of the that.
> Unfortunately, Vince found out (e.g. Behn) that the agents did not
> normally glue themselves to the Limousine, hence the fallback to the
> "JFK did not order the agents off of the limo" position.
>

Yes, he did. Because the agents DID glue themselves to the back of the
limousine during the Tampa motorcade. If only you knew how to use Google
you could see images of that Tampa motorcade online.

[mainframetech]

On Sunday, June 8, 2014 10:40:54 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:

> RELATED DISCUSSION AT AMAZON:
>
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/forum/history/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx33HXI3XVZDC8G&cdMsgID=Mx295YM3DE22O9N&cdMsgNo=1191&cdPage=48&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=TxBBN5SVEIZH59#Mx295YM3DE22O9N
>
>
>
> DVP SAID:
>
>
>
> Yes, Clint Hill's version of JFK's request that the SS agents stay off the
>
> bumpers is hearsay. It definitely is JUST that---hearsay. And evidently
>
> it's at least DOUBLE hearsay (since Hill didn't get the information
>
> directly from Floyd Boring himself). And I don't deny it's DOUBLE HEARSAY.
>

Did you check the comment made by Floyd Boring when he was going to be
interviewed by the ARRB? Had a real guilty sound to it. On the other
hand, the many interviews that Clint Hill had in public shows him as a
straight forward person. It's just as possible, since you're using all
those 'maybe' type terms, like probably and 'might have' and such, that
Boring was trying to keep agents off the platforms to be sure that there
was nothing interfering with a shot from the back at JFK.

>
>
> However, it's my opinion that JFK probably *DID* make such a casual
>
> request of the Secret Service agents in 1963. And there are two reasons
>
> why I believe that:
>
>
>
> 1.) I don't think the person from whom Clint Hill received his information
>
> on this matter just MADE UP the whole thing. That's kind of silly to
>
> believe that, IMO.
>

However, Floyd Boring may have 'made up' the comment he carried to Hill.

>
>
> 2.) Such a request to keep the agents off of the car just SOUNDS like
>
> something President Kennedy might very well have done. It fits JFK's
>
> character and overall style. We know that JFK liked to mingle with crowds,
>
> and he liked for the crowds to be able to see him and be near him (so he
>
> could shake their hands). And the SS agents being all over the car (not
>
> necessarily just the bumpers, but flanking the car on the sides as well)
>
> is *probably* something that John F. Kennedy didn't particularly care for
>
> very much.
>

From the many comments from agents about how easy JFK was to get along
with and to protect, and how he let them decide whatever they wanted to
do, it sounds very much like something JFK would NOT have said. An insult
('ivy league charlatans') wasn't his style.

>
>
> Kennedy knew he had to let them do their job, of course. But in the
>
> "different world" that existed when JFK was President (prior to 11/22/63,
>
> that is, which would have been prior to the biggest lesson of them all
>
> being learned by the United Stated Secret Service--which is: We cannot let
>
> the President drive around amongst heavy crowds in an open-top
>
> convertible), a request for the SS agents to "pull back" a little bit more
>
> (so to speak), particularly since we know how JFK felt about being
>
> accessible to the public, does indeed sound like a request that might very
>
> well have come from the lips of John F. Kennedy in 1963.
>

Not really. Agents walking alongside the limo wouldn't stop JFK from
getting out and shaking hands with anyone he chose. Same with agents on
the platforms. That's a non-starter. There were many pictures of JFK in
the limo and agents riding the platforms at the same time. As noted, it
was their choice if they felt there was a problem.

>
>
> I'm sure many people completely disagree with both of my points above. But
>
> so be it. Those are things I believe, and neither one is totally out of
>
> the bounds of reason or logic or common sense.
>

Welp, some of it doesn't fit the personality of JFK as told by the
agents themselves.

>
>
> But allow me to stress once again (as I did in a prior post) -- Regardless
>
> of whether JFK made any such request of the Secret Service or not, it
>
> DOESN'T MATTER ONE SINGLE BIT. And here's why....
>

It matters a great deal. If people in the protection detail are lying
for some reason, we need to find out why.



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


An attempt to brush off the standing down of SS agents from their
walking assignments alongside the limo (which they had done in the past
many times) is not going to work. The video of it happening is too
obviously against the usual orders and events. The surprise of the agent
in the video is too clear to most viewers to be covered up:

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

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

Blaine said it on TV.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 6/8/2014 11:39 AM, mainframetech wrote:

SOmetimes. Not always. Tampa changed that.

[mainframetech]

the report from James Rowley was dated the same as his cover up memo to
a WC lawyer attempting to prove that the limo couldn't have been taken to
Rouge, Michigan (Ford plant) to be stripped of all interior upholstery and
to have the windshield with the bullet hole in it replaced and to have it
completely refurbished, wiping out any evidence that may have been left
with it. The bullet hole in the windshield was from the outside in, and
said there was another shooter from in front of the limo, making it a
conspiracy and not a 'lone nut' murder.

Rowley had chosen the wrong date, because on that date the WH garage
log stated that there was no one that came that day to work on the limo as
Rowley had said there was. The log showed that the NEXT day was when the
repairmen arrived and signed in for work. By itself it may have just been
a mistake him picking that date to say that the limo was in the garage
being worked on, but the exact same mistake was made by Vaughn Ferguson,
the Ford Rep who's responsibility the limousine was. That duplication of
the date in trying to cover up that the limo traveled to get fixed up was
a giveaway, and showed that Rowley was looking to cover up for his dept.
and himself.

Rowley's memos and efforts to cover up and place blame elsewhere makes
him less dependable for information.

By saying that Palamara is unreliable, when he was one of the main
contacts for the public with the secret service agents, is a shot at a guy
when there is no one shooting back. Palamara has shown NO enmity toward
anyone in presenting his information, and I know of no reason to
disbelieve him.

Perhaps since he is more a CT, the LNs just automatically attack him,
like with Lifton and Horne. The fear and loathing that issue from the LNs
on hearing those names means to me that those are names who should be
listened to because with that kind of serious opposition, they must be
saying something damaging to the LN faith.

Chris

[mainframetech]

Go check with bigdog for help in doing this stuff.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

On 6/8/2014 10:40 AM, David Von Pein wrote:
> RELATED DISCUSSION AT AMAZON:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/forum/history/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx33HXI3XVZDC8G&cdMsgID=Mx295YM3DE22O9N&cdMsgNo=1191&cdPage=48&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=TxBBN5SVEIZH59#Mx295YM3DE22O9N
>
> DVP SAID:
>
> Yes, Clint Hill's version of JFK's request that the SS agents stay off the
> bumpers is hearsay. It definitely is JUST that---hearsay. And evidently
> it's at least DOUBLE hearsay (since Hill didn't get the information
> directly from Floyd Boring himself). And I don't deny it's DOUBLE HEARSAY.
>

No. It was corroborted by Jerry Blaine.

> However, it's my opinion that JFK probably *DID* make such a casual
> request of the Secret Service agents in 1963. And there are two reasons
> why I believe that:
>
> 1.) I don't think the person from whom Clint Hill received his information
> on this matter just MADE UP the whole thing. That's kind of silly to
> believe that, IMO.
>
> 2.) Such a request to keep the agents off of the car just SOUNDS like
> something President Kennedy might very well have done. It fits JFK's

Only after Tampa.

[news]

Anthony Marsh <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in
news:5394ba62$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu:

This is what I don't understand about Blaine's explanation: how does
having the agents on the back of the limo not "wear them out"? Bending
over and grabbing the hand-hold for 28 miles sounds a lot more tiring than
standing upright on the backup car.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 6/7/2014 11:30 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
> The whole issue of "Agents On The Bumper" is a moot one anyway, because
> there are dozens of photos showing JFK riding in motorcades prior to 11/22
> when no SS agents are anywhere near the bumper of SS-100-X (regardless of
> any preferences uttered by JFK or not). Such as the nine examples provided
> on the webpage below (seven of which involve SS-100-X and two featuring a
> Cadillac limo which has no built-in steps; but even in those two examples,
> there's no SS agents walking alongside the car)....
>

Your sentence structure is awkward. It sounds as though you are trying to
say that JFK's limo did not have built-in steps. But you know that it not
true. WHICH Cadillac did not have built-in steps? The SS car did as THAT
was the Presidential limousine until they got the Lincoln.

> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html#Excerpt-From-December-1963-Secret-Service-Report
>

Now do you see why it's important to post graphics in this newsgroup
inline? You may be making a valid point, but people can't SEE it.

> Ergo....11/22/63 was no different whatsoever than any other pre-Nov. 22
> motorcade with respect to agents riding the bumpers. They would ride the
> bumpers only AS NEEDED (via Clint Hill's testimony quoted in my previous
> post).
>

No, in the Tampa motorcade they stood on the rear bumper steps all the time.

> For some reason, many CTers just cannot seem to grasp that basic fact.
>

Maybe because we aren't allowed to see all the pictures. Maybe you should
spend your time trying to get the government to declassify ALL the files,
including the JFK Library.

[Bud]

Issue 12,751 that the hobbyists can`t go anywhere with.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 6/7/2014 9:50 PM, mainframetech wrote:
> On Saturday, June 7, 2014 9:04:39 AM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
>> On Saturday, June 7, 2014 1:21:58 AM UTC-4, Mitch Todd wrote:
>>
>>> This is one of the blurbs off of Lancer for Vince's "Agents Go on Record"
>>
>>>
>>
>>> essay:
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> 'Behn (interviewed three times on 9/27/92) -- "I don't remember Kennedy
>>
>>>
>>
>>> ever saying that he didn't want anybody on the back of his car. I think if
>>
>>>
>>
>>> you watch the newsreel pictures and whatnot, you'll find agents on there
>>
>>>
>>
>>> from time to time."'
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> "from time to time." In other words, Behn is saying that the SS agents
>>
>>>
>>
>>> generally stayed off of the limo.
>>
>
>
> Nope, that gimmick won't work. From 'time to time' could be every other
> day for all we know. There were times that they felt it was more useful
> and safer to have someone on those platforms, and that was a decision of
> the SS, NOT of JFK. The statement made about talking to most of the SS
> agents over the years was
>
> "PRESIDENT KENNEDY WAS A VERY NICE MAN AND, AS MANY AGENTS TOLD ME (IN
> WRITING AND ON TAPE), HE *NEVER* INTERFERED WITH THEIR ACTIONS!" Comment
> by Vince Palamara, most knowledgeable of the Secret Service researchers.
>
> From: http://vincepalamara.blogspot.com/
>

Nonsense. Vince is a kook, misrepresenting historical facts to push a
political agenda.

[Anthony Marsh]

Until Tampa when he got fed up with them.

> Chris
>

[David Von Pein]

Proving (once again) that the placement of the SS agents near the
President's car in Dallas was no different whatsoever than in previous
motorcades.....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/08/jfk-in-san-diego-june-6-1963.html

[news]

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

news:5394...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu:

> On 6/7/2014 11:30 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
>> The whole issue of "Agents On The Bumper" is a moot one anyway,
>> because there are dozens of photos showing JFK riding in motorcades
>> prior to 11/22 when no SS agents are anywhere near the bumper of
>> SS-100-X (regardless of any preferences uttered by JFK or not). Such
>> as the nine examples provided on the webpage below (seven of which
>> involve SS-100-X and two featuring a Cadillac limo which has no
>> built-in steps; but even in those two examples, there's no SS agents
>> walking alongside the car)....
>>
>
> Your sentence structure is awkward. It sounds as though you are trying
> to say that JFK's limo did not have built-in steps. But you know that
> it not true. WHICH Cadillac did not have built-in steps? The SS car
> did as THAT was the Presidential limousine until they got the Lincoln.
>
>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html#Excerpt-F
>> rom-December-1963-Secret-Service-Report
>>
>
> Now do you see why it's important to post graphics in this newsgroup
> inline? You may be making a valid point, but people can't SEE it.
>
>> Ergo....11/22/63 was no different whatsoever than any other pre-Nov.
>> 22 motorcade with respect to agents riding the bumpers. They would
>> ride the bumpers only AS NEEDED (via Clint Hill's testimony quoted in
>> my previous post).
>>
>
> No, in the Tampa motorcade they stood on the rear bumper steps all the
> time.

Most of the time.

http://s30.postimg.org/uydzgfd81/JFK_motorcade.jpg

http://s16.postimg.org/6lldesmfp/0423563076_11933297_8col.jpg

[Anthony Marsh]

On 6/7/2014 9:05 AM, bigdog wrote:
> The obvious question is, "If JFK didn't order or at least strongly suggest the SS agents not ride the bumper, why wouldn't they have been there all the time? Why would they ever not be in posiition to immediately move to protect him? The answer is as obvious as the question.
>

I guess you haven't looked at other motorcades.
Sometimes they walked next to the limo to keep people back.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 6/7/2014 9:04 AM, bigdog wrote:
> On Saturday, June 7, 2014 1:21:58 AM UTC-4, Mitch Todd wrote:
>> This is one of the blurbs off of Lancer for Vince's "Agents Go on Record"
>>
>> essay:
>>
>>
>>
>> 'Behn (interviewed three times on 9/27/92) -- "I don't remember Kennedy
>>
>> ever saying that he didn't want anybody on the back of his car. I think if
>>
>> you watch the newsreel pictures and whatnot, you'll find agents on there
>>
>> from time to time."'
>>
>>
>>
>> "from time to time." In other words, Behn is saying that the SS agents
>>
>> generally stayed off of the limo.
>>

> Precisely. The SS agents concern was the protection of the POTUS. Had it been their call, I'm sure they would have been riding the bumber all the time. JFK's primary concern was politics. That dictated they not be on the bumper, so most of the time, politics trumped safety.
>

No, that is not what they always did.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 6/7/2014 1:17 AM, OHLeeRedux wrote:
> Clint Hill can be seen in several films squatting down when he is riding
> on the rear step of the presidential limo, obviously so JFK cannot see him
> there.
>


No, Obviously so that he doesn't block the public's view of JFK.
THAT's what the dispute was about.

[David Von Pein]

ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

Your sentence structure is awkward. It sounds as though you are trying to
say that JFK's limo did not have built-in steps. But you know that it not
true. WHICH Cadillac did not have built-in steps? The SS car did as THAT
was the Presidential limousine until they got the Lincoln.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

You're right, Tony. I stand corrected. The Cadillac parade car that was
used by JFK prior to the Lincoln limo being added to the White House fleet
in June 1961 did, indeed, have the built-in steps on the back. My error.

Which only adds still more emphasis to the whole point I was making when
discussing the nine pictures that I posted on this webpage below (scroll
just a tiny bit to get to them, Tony).....

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

The reason you couldn't find the pics before, Tony, is because I made
another mistake by linking to an anchored portion of that webpage, which
pulled it way down the page by default. (Two DVP gaffes in one post;
that's gotta be a record. My apologies.) :-)

[Anthony Marsh]

Which is why we should be able to post images inline.
On another forum the idiots keep making the mistake of linking to
Photobucket and the images have been deleted.

[neopa...@aol.com]

Another inaccurate/incentiary topic heading by .John. I am impressed that
his link went to a site other than his own. Does anyone even read his
stuff or the links?

The biggest problem the Lone Nut Buffs has is that they have to defend the
whole Warren Theory House of Cards. Which is impossible. All one has to
do is simply nudge any card with the slightest tap and it all collapses.

History will not be kind to the Lone Nut Buffs. Imagine staking your
entire professional reputation and career on the Warren Myth?

Almost make me feel sorry for them - almost.

Nah I don't feel sorry for them.

[Lanny]

On Sunday, June 8, 2014 11:45:20 AM UTC-4, Mitch Todd wrote:

>
> The underlying (and more important) question is whether the Secret Service
>
> agents were uncharacteristically kept off of the limo by Unnamed Nefarious
>
> Powers in order to facilitate the assassination. I suspect that Palmara
>
> was hoping that he'd find evidence of the that. Unfortunately, Vince found
>
> out (e.g. Behn) that the agents did not normally glue themselves to the
>
> Limousine, hence the fallback to the "JFK did not order the agents off of
>
> the limo" position.
>
>

But the even more precise context of the silly argument is whether SAs Don
Lawton and/or Henry Rybka specifically were pulled off their assigned
positions on the back of the Presidential limo. In the YouTube video that
CTs have been frothing over for a decade or so, it's Lawton shrugging his
shoulders and turning his hands palms up, as if he doesn't understand why
he is being pulled off the President's car. Since this is supposedly the
moment when Emory Roberts "stripped" a pre-assigned level of security off
the presidential limo, Lawton's subsequent actions and observations would
seem particularly relevant.

A Secret Service report on the "Assassination of President Kennedy" was
submitted to Treasury Secretary C. Douglas Dillon from Secret Service
Chief James Rowley on December 18, 1963. This report would later be
received by the Warren Commission and designated as "Commission Document
3."
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10404

In part three of that report between exhibits 11 and 12 is a "Duty
Assignment Index" detailing the assignment of agents Lawton, Wagner,
Rybka, Patterson and O'Leary to security at Love Field. Following the
assignment index is Exhibit 12, the official reports of approximately 30
Secret Service agents outlining their actions on 11/22/63. The first five
statements are those of the agents assigned to Love Field. These five
statements were also separately designated by the Warren Commission as
Commission Exhibit 2554 in Volume XXV.

If agent Lawton was shocked, perplexed, mystified or in any way irritated
at having been pulled from his "assigned position" on the back of the
presidential limousine, it is not reflected either in his report or that
of the other four agents in contact with him in the minutes immediately
following his alleged unexpected re-assignment.

In fact, in his official report dated November 30, 1963, Lawton referred
to his duty that day quite simply: "I was assigned to the Press Area upon
arrival (at Love Field) and my instructions were to remain at the airport
to affect security for the President's departure."

If Lawton was unaware of any last minute plans to remove himself or any
other agents from the rear of the presidential limo, it would seem likely
that agents Rybka and field office agents Wagner and Patterson would have
been in the dark as well. In fact, Rybka also noted in his report that he
briefly jogged alongside the presidential limo "until the motorcade picked
up speed. From this point I returned to the immediate area of Air Force
One."

If either Lawton or Rybka (or both) had been inexplicably pulled from
their ASSIGNED position on the back of the President's car, one would
think that such a turn of events would have made for interesting "shop
talk" at lunch over Rybka's "sandwich and coffee."

Instead, everyone must have subsequently been brought in to the conspiracy
circle consistent with the 50-year operative assumption that
non-conspirators can instantly be converted to active conspirators simply
upon the command of a supervisor or other higher ranking authority at any
point as the criminal conspiracy evolves. Of all the things conspiracy
theorists labor to prove, most notably absent is any evidence that these
"magic marching orders" ever actually occurred.

I never ceased to be amazed at the hubris that affords them that luxury.

[mainframetech]

I've listed a number of times that JFK had agents riding the platforms
right here in the last few days. And as the agents said, they rode the
platforms as they felt it was necessary depending on the location and the
circumstances. LNs are working hard to blame JFK for his own murder!

Note too, that Tampa was just before Dallas.

Chris

[mainframetech]

A lot less tiring than running alongside the limo for 28 miles...that's
more than a marathon...:)

From comments from many of the agents about JFK, using an insulting
phrase like "ivy league charlatans" was NOT JFK's style. But it's
important to the LNs to blame JFK for his own murder!

Chris

[news]

mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:bbb7f80b-ef64-4dea...@googlegroups.com:

Well I'm sure that was never an option. The two options were 1) crowching
on the bumper or 2) standing on the follow-up car. Option #1 seems a lot
more tiring to me, so I don't get Blaine's logic.

> From comments from many of the agents about JFK, using an insulting
> phrase like "ivy league charlatans" was NOT JFK's style. But it's
> important to the LNs to blame JFK for his own murder!

Of course he played a hand in his own murder. Vain Kennedy insisted on
open limos in a country rife with guns. SS Agents can't outrun a bullet.

[news]

mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:406e4a0a-6ff6-4c9c-
955c-b4f...@googlegroups.com:

No you didn't. Aside from Tampa, which appears to be an anamoly, please
link to photos showing agents on the bumpers IN the United States.
Shouldn't be too hard if it was as common as you allege.

> And as the agents said, they rode the
> platforms as they felt it was necessary depending on the location and
the
> circumstances.

Which was almost never in the United States. Tampa, not Dallas, was the
deviation from protocol. BTW, the photos I posted yesterday showing
agents ON and then OFF the bumper in Tampa seem to square with Blaine's
story.

[OHLeeRedux]

neopa...@aol.com

You are funny.

But that's all you are -- just funny.

[Anthony Marsh]

Nice, but I notice you didn't mention some obvious differences. Didn't you
notice the photographers truck to the front of the limo? Did you notice
that JFK is just using the hat as a prop. He hardly ever wore hats.
Notable exception was the inauguration. Notice in Dallas how he didn't
want to try on the Texas hat they gave him? Anyway, it was too windy that
day to wear a hat. He put his cap on at the last minute and took it off to
speak and you can see how much it messed up his hair.


How many SS agents do you see in the follow-up car? 4 on the running
boards and NONE in the rear seat. Not like Dallas, which displaced a
couple of SS agents and the WH photographer to let Ken O'Donnell and Dave
Powers ride in the SS car. Notice that they flipped up the right jump seat
to allow JFK to stand up and hold onto the parade bar. Don't know who he
guy in he left jump seat is. Looks like a assistant to one of the
politicians.


Did you notice that they switched to the shorter back-up limo?

[Anthony Marsh]

What was going to tire them out is walking next to the limo for 28 miles.
IN short motorcades the SS agents would walk next to the limo all the way.

[Anthony Marsh]

I knew Vince a long time ago and saw him turning into a kook.
I warned him that he was headed down the wrong road.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 6/8/2014 5:48 PM, mainframetech wrote:
> On Sunday, June 8, 2014 10:40:54 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
>> RELATED DISCUSSION AT AMAZON:
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/forum/history/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=Fx33HXI3XVZDC8G&cdMsgID=Mx295YM3DE22O9N&cdMsgNo=1191&cdPage=48&cdSort=oldest&cdThread=TxBBN5SVEIZH59#Mx295YM3DE22O9N
>>
>>
>>
>> DVP SAID:
>>
>>
>>
>> Yes, Clint Hill's version of JFK's request that the SS agents stay off the
>>
>> bumpers is hearsay. It definitely is JUST that---hearsay. And evidently
>>
>> it's at least DOUBLE hearsay (since Hill didn't get the information
>>
>> directly from Floyd Boring himself). And I don't deny it's DOUBLE HEARSAY.
>>
>
>

> Did you check the comment made by Floyd Boring when he was going to be
> interviewed by the ARRB? Had a real guilty sound to it. On the other
> hand, the many interviews that Clint Hill had in public shows him as a
> straight forward person. It's just as possible, since you're using all
> those 'maybe' type terms, like probably and 'might have' and such, that
> Boring was trying to keep agents off the platforms to be sure that there
> was nothing interfering with a shot from the back at JFK.
>
>
>>
>>

>> However, it's my opinion that JFK probably *DID* make such a casual
>>
>> request of the Secret Service agents in 1963. And there are two reasons
>>
>> why I believe that:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1.) I don't think the person from whom Clint Hill received his information
>>
>> on this matter just MADE UP the whole thing. That's kind of silly to
>>
>> believe that, IMO.
>>
>
>

> However, Floyd Boring may have 'made up' the comment he carried to Hill.
>
>
>>
>>

>> 2.) Such a request to keep the agents off of the car just SOUNDS like
>>
>> something President Kennedy might very well have done. It fits JFK's
>>
>> character and overall style. We know that JFK liked to mingle with crowds,
>>
>> and he liked for the crowds to be able to see him and be near him (so he
>>
>> could shake their hands). And the SS agents being all over the car (not
>>
>> necessarily just the bumpers, but flanking the car on the sides as well)
>>
>> is *probably* something that John F. Kennedy didn't particularly care for
>>
>> very much.
>>
>
>

> From the many comments from agents about how easy JFK was to get along
> with and to protect, and how he let them decide whatever they wanted to
> do, it sounds very much like something JFK would NOT have said. An insult
> ('ivy league charlatans') wasn't his style.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> Kennedy knew he had to let them do their job, of course. But in the
>>
>> "different world" that existed when JFK was President (prior to 11/22/63,
>>
>> that is, which would have been prior to the biggest lesson of them all
>>
>> being learned by the United Stated Secret Service--which is: We cannot let
>>
>> the President drive around amongst heavy crowds in an open-top
>>
>> convertible), a request for the SS agents to "pull back" a little bit more
>>
>> (so to speak), particularly since we know how JFK felt about being
>>
>> accessible to the public, does indeed sound like a request that might very
>>
>> well have come from the lips of John F. Kennedy in 1963.
>>
>
>
> Not really. Agents walking alongside the limo wouldn't stop JFK from
> getting out and shaking hands with anyone he chose. Same with agents on
> the platforms. That's a non-starter. There were many pictures of JFK in
> the limo and agents riding the platforms at the same time. As noted, it
> was their choice if they felt there was a problem.
>
>
>>
>>
>> I'm sure many people completely disagree with both of my points above. But
>>
>> so be it. Those are things I believe, and neither one is totally out of
>>
>> the bounds of reason or logic or common sense.
>>
>
>
> Welp, some of it doesn't fit the personality of JFK as told by the
> agents themselves.
>
>
>>
>>

>> But allow me to stress once again (as I did in a prior post) -- Regardless
>>
>> of whether JFK made any such request of the Secret Service or not, it
>>
>> DOESN'T MATTER ONE SINGLE BIT. And here's why....
>>
>
>

> It matters a great deal. If people in the protection detail are lying
> for some reason, we need to find out why.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/secret-service.html
>
>
> An attempt to brush off the standing down of SS agents from their
> walking assignments alongside the limo (which they had done in the past
> many times) is not going to work. The video of it happening is too
> obviously against the usual orders and events. The surprise of the agent
> in the video is too clear to most viewers to be covered up:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XY02Qkuc_f8
>
> Chris
>

Vince is a kook. There was never any plan to have the SS agents walk the
entire Dallas motorcade route. They planned for the limo speed to average
15 MPH. No human can WALK that fast for 11 miles. What happened at Love
Field was that the 4 SS agents walking along with the limo would normally
hop onto the running board of the SS car as the limo sped up. 3 of them
did. But the fourth SS agent could not because on of the SS agents who was
supposed to be in the rear seat was standing on the running board. They
were short one seat.Because 2 Presidential aides were riding in the SS
car. They even kicked out the official WH photographer so that Dave Powers
could take a home movie.

[Bud]

No, we blame the person who killed him, Oswald.

[cmikes]

On Monday, June 9, 2014 10:20:03 AM UTC-4, neopa...@aol.com wrote:
> Another inaccurate/incentiary topic heading by .John. I am impressed that
>
> his link went to a site other than his own. Does anyone even read his
>
> stuff or the links?
>

Yes, I use his site quite a lot when I'm looking for stuff. It's easier
to find links off his site sometimes rather than wading all the way
through the HSCA or Clark panel reports trying to remember where I saw a
particular point.

>
>
> The biggest problem the Lone Nut Buffs has is that they have to defend the
>
> whole Warren Theory House of Cards. Which is impossible. All one has to
>
> do is simply nudge any card with the slightest tap and it all collapses.
>
>
>
> History will not be kind to the Lone Nut Buffs. Imagine staking your
>
> entire professional reputation and career on the Warren Myth?
>

This is something I've seen a lot of CTs do, trying to say that the Warren
Report was the last word on the JFK assassination. Have you ever heard of
the HSCA? Or the Clark Panel? How about the Rockefeller Commission?
There have also been several high quality documentaries, mostly by the
Discovery Channel, on the subject of the assassination.

It's the same thing as saying, "I feel sorry for all those astronomers
staking their career on the Earth revolving around the Sun" while totally
ignoring everything we've learned since then.

>
> Almost make me feel sorry for them - almost.
>
>
>
> Nah I don't feel sorry for them.

Why feel sorry for the winning side? Every subsequent investigation has
merely proven that the Warren Commission was right. Of course, they
didn't get every single detail correct, because they were human and
nothing human is perfect, but no one has ever come forward with any
credible evidence to challenge the fact that Lee Oswald assassinated JFK
by himself.

[news]

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

news:5395f777$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu:

And in long motorcades, they'd stand on the backup car. So why the sudden
change in Tampa? His reasoning just doesn't make sense.

[mainframetech]

Agents were on or off the platforms depending on their decision to do
with the circumstances at any one time. Here's a few photos of the agents
on the platforms with JFK inside. I found them in only 1 search with
Google, and there were more but it was too much bother:

http://lotpro.com/blogphotos/Presidential%20Rides/tn_JFK%20Limousine.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LFGTVIb01bU/UoPbzhqMuLI/AAAAAAAAwsk/btCcKcpbeAU/s801/JFK-Motorcade-In-Dallas-November-22-1963.jpg
http://www.sott.net/image/image/s7/157884/large/JFK3.jpg
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0eiRwbPM1cY/T7f8N28xjkI/AAAAAAAABI8/kX7WDpLf0zA/s1600/381622_2776255321078_1098954157_2968840_574378480_n.jpg

We need to also consider that it's been 50 years and many of the older
photos before the murder wouldn't be kept online anymore, but the day of
the murder there were plenty, except that day there was no one on the
platforms.

Chris

[mainframetech]

True, they can't outrun a bullet, but they could get in the way of one
if in the right position to foil a shot from the rear.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Monday, June 9, 2014 10:22:31 AM UTC-4, Lanny wrote:
> On Sunday, June 8, 2014 11:45:20 AM UTC-4, Mitch Todd wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
> > The underlying (and more important) question is whether the Secret Service
>
> >
>
> > agents were uncharacteristically kept off of the limo by Unnamed Nefarious
>
> >
>
> > Powers in order to facilitate the assassination. I suspect that Palmara
>
> >
>
> > was hoping that he'd find evidence of the that. Unfortunately, Vince found
>
> >
>
> > out (e.g. Behn) that the agents did not normally glue themselves to the
>
> >
>
> > Limousine, hence the fallback to the "JFK did not order the agents off of
>
> >
>
> > the limo" position.
>

I don't know ANY CTs that believed that there SS agents were 'glued' to
the platforms. And Palamara found exactly what I myself believed, which
is that they got on the platforms when they felt it was necessary. How
could anyone think otherwise? Since there were time when they were seen
on them and times when they were off them. So the truth was not something
to 'fall back on', but the way things were normally.

> >
>
> >
>
>
>
> But the even more precise context of the silly argument is whether SAs Don
>
> Lawton and/or Henry Rybka specifically were pulled off their assigned
>
> positions on the back of the Presidential limo. In the YouTube video that
>
> CTs have been frothing over for a decade or so, it's Lawton shrugging his
>
> shoulders and turning his hands palms up, as if he doesn't understand why
>
> he is being pulled off the President's car. Since this is supposedly the
>
> moment when Emory Roberts "stripped" a pre-assigned level of security off
>
> the presidential limo, Lawton's subsequent actions and observations would
>
> seem particularly relevant.
>

Not necessarily.

>
>
> A Secret Service report on the "Assassination of President Kennedy" was
>
> submitted to Treasury Secretary C. Douglas Dillon from Secret Service
>
> Chief James Rowley on December 18, 1963. This report would later be
>
> received by the Warren Commission and designated as "Commission Document
>
> 3."
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10404
>
>
>
> In part three of that report between exhibits 11 and 12 is a "Duty
>
> Assignment Index" detailing the assignment of agents Lawton, Wagner,
>
> Rybka, Patterson and O'Leary to security at Love Field. Following the
>
> assignment index is Exhibit 12, the official reports of approximately 30
>
> Secret Service agents outlining their actions on 11/22/63. The first five
>
> statements are those of the agents assigned to Love Field. These five
>
> statements were also separately designated by the Warren Commission as
>
> Commission Exhibit 2554 in Volume XXV.
>
>
>
> If agent Lawton was shocked, perplexed, mystified or in any way irritated
>
> at having been pulled from his "assigned position" on the back of the
>
> presidential limousine, it is not reflected either in his report or that
>
> of the other four agents in contact with him in the minutes immediately
>
> following his alleged unexpected re-assignment.
>

You don't think that Rowley would submit a report with any sort of
failure or bad news in it do you? And most teams would stick together and
not mention anything that might be misconstrued at a later time. Rowley
would see to it that Lawton wouldn't record his confusion:

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

>
>
> In fact, in his official report dated November 30, 1963, Lawton referred
>
> to his duty that day quite simply: "I was assigned to the Press Area upon
>
> arrival (at Love Field) and my instructions were to remain at the airport
>
> to affect security for the President's departure."
>

As expected, he didn't mention his confusion that we all saw. And yet
he was with his team when it pulled out, even though he said he was to
remain at the airport.

>
>
> If Lawton was unaware of any last minute plans to remove himself or any
>
> other agents from the rear of the presidential limo, it would seem likely
>
> that agents Rybka and field office agents Wagner and Patterson would have
>
> been in the dark as well. In fact, Rybka also noted in his report that he
>
> briefly jogged alongside the presidential limo "until the motorcade picked
>
> up speed. From this point I returned to the immediate area of Air Force
>
> One."
>

You can't change what we all saw.

>
>
> If either Lawton or Rybka (or both) had been inexplicably pulled from
>
> their ASSIGNED position on the back of the President's car, one would
>
> think that such a turn of events would have made for interesting "shop
>
> talk" at lunch over Rybka's "sandwich and coffee."
>
>
>
> Instead, everyone must have subsequently been brought in to the conspiracy
>
> circle consistent with the 50-year operative assumption that
>
> non-conspirators can instantly be converted to active conspirators simply
>
> upon the command of a supervisor or other higher ranking authority at any
>
> point as the criminal conspiracy evolves. Of all the things conspiracy
>
> theorists labor to prove, most notably absent is any evidence that these
>
> "magic marching orders" ever actually occurred.
>
>
>
> I never ceased to be amazed at the hubris that affords them that luxury.

I never cease to be amazed at the efforts to dig up some reason for the
confusion that was engendered in the agent that was ordered to stop pacing
the limo. But we all saw it, and there's no putting toothpaste back in
the tube.

Chris

[news]

mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:588d6c5b-5415-43eb...@googlegroups.com:

What about the front? Or the side? They'd have to be on every side of
Kennedy in order to protect him, and there's no way he would have put up
with that. When you insist on open limos, you're putting your life at
risk. The SS agents are too classy to say that Kennedy's arrogance played
a part in his demise, but I'm not.

[news]

mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:3a97a290-5154-4f21...@googlegroups.com:

That's Berlin (overseas). Doesn't count because security was always higher
in foreign countries.

> http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LFGTVIb01bU/UoPbzhqMuLI/AAAAAAAAwsk/btCcKcpbe
AU/s801/JFK-Motorcade-In-Dallas-November-22-1963.jpg

Hill wasn't part of Kennedy's SS team. And he wasn't on the bumper from the
beginning of the motorcade, only periodically.

> http://www.sott.net/image/image/s7/157884/large/JFK3.jpg

That's Tampa (the anamoly). I said BEFORE Tampa.

> http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0eiRwbPM1cY/T7f8N28xjkI/AAAAAAAABI8/kX7WDpLf0
> zA/s1600/381622_2776255321078_1098954157_2968840_574378480_n.jpg

That's Germany (overseas). Doesn't count.

> We need to also consider that it's been 50 years and many of the
> older
> photos before the murder wouldn't be kept online anymore, but the day
> of the murder there were plenty, except that day there was no one on
> the platforms.
>
> Chris

Nonsense. There are hundreds of JFK motorcade photos pre-November 1963. The
reason you can't find any evidence of agents on the bumpers in the US,
aside from Tampa? Because it wasn't standard protocol.

[Anthony Marsh]

Learn to quote properly.

[Lanny]

On Monday, June 9, 2014 8:05:22 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
>
> You don't think that Rowley would submit a report with any sort of
> failure or bad news in it do you? And most teams would stick together and
> not mention anything that might be misconstrued at a later time. Rowley
> would see to it that Lawton wouldn't record his confusion:

Is that how it works in your office? If you and a handful of other
employees had irrefutable proof that the top management of your company
had conspired to commit a felony that resulted in actually killing
innocent people or defrauding your clients or customers out of huge sums
of money, would you all just remain quiet because you were told to?
Would it be fair for the rest of us here to assume that your own
commitment to the rule of law and personal ethics is no better than what
you apparently believe is the most likely response of others?

> As expected, he didn't mention his confusion that we all saw. And yet
> he was with his team when it pulled out, even though he said he was to
> remain at the airport.

Field agents Wagner and Patterson and SA John O'Leary specifically wrote
in their reports that they assisted Lawton with security duties at the
airport while the motorcade was downtown. Wagner and Patterson's reports
were dated the day of the assassination. O'Leary's was dated November 30.
Lawton was at Love Field because that's where his "team" was. That's
where he was assigned. He was never assigned to the motorcade. That is
what the evidence shows apart from any subjective interpretation of his
body language on a silent film clip.

> You can't change what we all saw.

You don't have a clue as to what you saw.





> Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

You left out the third and fourth options.
3) siting in he follow-up car and 4) walking next to the limousine.

>> From comments from many of the agents about JFK, using an insulting
>> phrase like "ivy league charlatans" was NOT JFK's style. But it's
>> important to the LNs to blame JFK for his own murder!
>
> Of course he played a hand in his own murder. Vain Kennedy insisted on
> open limos in a country rife with guns. SS Agents can't outrun a bullet.
>

Why even go out at all? Just stay in the underground bunker. Yet I never
see you criticize other Presidents who were shot.

[Anthony Marsh]

Have you ever listened to the JFK tapes? Obviously not.

[Anthony Marsh]

And who was assigned to ride in the follow-up car?

[Anthony Marsh]

Not all the photos are in the JFK Library.

[Anthony Marsh]

That would not block the FATAL shot from the grassy knoll.

[Anthony Marsh]

Not just stand on he running board. Also sit on the several seats in the
rear.

Blaine did not want them walking the entire 28 miles.

[news]

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

news:53966668$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu:

#4 was not an option in Tampa, unless you expected agents to jog 28
miles.

>>> From comments from many of the agents about JFK, using an
>>> insulting
>>> phrase like "ivy league charlatans" was NOT JFK's style. But it's
>>> important to the LNs to blame JFK for his own murder!
>>
>> Of course he played a hand in his own murder. Vain Kennedy insisted
>> on open limos in a country rife with guns. SS Agents can't outrun a
>> bullet.
>>
>
> Why even go out at all? Just stay in the underground bunker. Yet I
> never see you criticize other Presidents who were shot.

Subsequent presidents haven't been stupid enough to ride in slow-moving
open-air limos for miles and miles. Nowadays, if someone pops you on the
rope-line or at an event, that's on the SS, not you.

[Bud]

If the President can be seen the President can be shot.

>
>
> Chris

[Bud]

You are wrong as usual, there were agents on the platforms that day in
Dallas...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-LFGTVIb01bU/UoPbzhqMuLI/AAAAAAAAwsk/btCcKcpbeAU/s801/JFK-Motorcade-In-Dallas-November-22-1963.jpg

[Bud]

On Monday, June 9, 2014 8:05:22 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:

And you can`t make anything out of it.

>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > If either Lawton or Rybka (or both) had been inexplicably pulled from
>
> >
>
> > their ASSIGNED position on the back of the President's car, one would
>
> >
>
> > think that such a turn of events would have made for interesting "shop
>
> >
>
> > talk" at lunch over Rybka's "sandwich and coffee."
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Instead, everyone must have subsequently been brought in to the conspiracy
>
> >
>
> > circle consistent with the 50-year operative assumption that
>
> >
>
> > non-conspirators can instantly be converted to active conspirators simply
>
> >
>
> > upon the command of a supervisor or other higher ranking authority at any
>
> >
>
> > point as the criminal conspiracy evolves. Of all the things conspiracy
>
> >
>
> > theorists labor to prove, most notably absent is any evidence that these
>
> >
>
> > "magic marching orders" ever actually occurred.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I never ceased to be amazed at the hubris that affords them that luxury.
>
>
>
>
>
> I never cease to be amazed at the efforts to dig up some reason for the
>
> confusion that was engendered in the agent that was ordered to stop pacing
>
> the limo. But we all saw it, and there's no putting toothpaste back in
>
> the tube.

You say you saw confusion. Have you established the cause?

>
>
> Chris

[mainframetech]

On Monday, June 9, 2014 10:10:06 PM UTC-4, Lanny wrote:
> On Monday, June 9, 2014 8:05:22 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > You don't think that Rowley would submit a report with any sort of
>
> > failure or bad news in it do you? And most teams would stick together and
>
> > not mention anything that might be misconstrued at a later time. Rowley
>
> > would see to it that Lawton wouldn't record his confusion:
>
>
>
> Is that how it works in your office? If you and a handful of other
>
> employees had irrefutable proof that the top management of your company
>
> had conspired to commit a felony that resulted in actually killing
>
> innocent people or defrauding your clients or customers out of huge sums
>
> of money, would you all just remain quiet because you were told to?
>
> Would it be fair for the rest of us here to assume that your own
>
> commitment to the rule of law and personal ethics is no better than what
>
> you apparently believe is the most likely response of others?
>

If there were a major problem in my department, no one would speak up,
but that changes from office to office. In uniformed ranks it is
stronger, and also in law enforcement it's stronger.

>
>
>
>
> > As expected, he didn't mention his confusion that we all saw. And yet
>
> > he was with his team when it pulled out, even though he said he was to
>
> > remain at the airport.
>
>
>
> Field agents Wagner and Patterson and SA John O'Leary specifically wrote
>
> in their reports that they assisted Lawton with security duties at the
>
> airport while the motorcade was downtown. Wagner and Patterson's reports
>
> were dated the day of the assassination. O'Leary's was dated November 30.
>
> Lawton was at Love Field because that's where his "team" was. That's
>
> where he was assigned. He was never assigned to the motorcade. That is
>
> what the evidence shows apart from any subjective interpretation of his
>
> body language on a silent film clip.
>
>
>
>
>
> > You can't change what we all saw.
>
>
>
> You don't have a clue as to what you saw.
>
>

and that's your best argument against the confusion caused by ordering
the agent off the limo?

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

On 6/9/2014 6:41 PM, cmikes wrote:
> On Monday, June 9, 2014 10:20:03 AM UTC-4, neopa...@aol.com wrote:

>> Another inaccurate/incentiary topic heading by .John. I am impressed that
>>
>> his link went to a site other than his own. Does anyone even read his
>>
>> stuff or the links?
>>
>

> Yes, I use his site quite a lot when I'm looking for stuff. It's easier
> to find links off his site sometimes rather than wading all the way
> through the HSCA or Clark panel reports trying to remember where I saw a
> particular point.
>
>
>>
>>

>> The biggest problem the Lone Nut Buffs has is that they have to defend the
>>
>> whole Warren Theory House of Cards. Which is impossible. All one has to
>>
>> do is simply nudge any card with the slightest tap and it all collapses.
>>
>>
>>
>> History will not be kind to the Lone Nut Buffs. Imagine staking your
>>
>> entire professional reputation and career on the Warren Myth?
>>
>

> This is something I've seen a lot of CTs do, trying to say that the Warren
> Report was the last word on the JFK assassination. Have you ever heard of
> the HSCA? Or the Clark Panel? How about the Rockefeller Commission?
> There have also been several high quality documentaries, mostly by the
> Discovery Channel, on the subject of the assassination.
>
> It's the same thing as saying, "I feel sorry for all those astronomers
> staking their career on the Earth revolving around the Sun" while totally
> ignoring everything we've learned since then.
>
>>

>> Almost make me feel sorry for them - almost.
>>
>>
>>
>> Nah I don't feel sorry for them.
>

> Why feel sorry for the winning side? Every subsequent investigation has
> merely proven that the Warren Commission was right. Of course, they
> didn't get every single detail correct, because they were human and
> nothing human is perfect, but no one has ever come forward with any
> credible evidence to challenge the fact that Lee Oswald assassinated JFK
> by himself.
>

We won in 1978. 7-5

[mainframetech]

Clint Hill wasn't part of the Kennedy team? He was assigned to Jackie Kennedy, is that Kennedy enough for you?

>
>
> > http://www.sott.net/image/image/s7/157884/large/JFK3.jpg
>
>
>
> That's Tampa (the anamoly). I said BEFORE Tampa.
>
>
>
> > http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0eiRwbPM1cY/T7f8N28xjkI/AAAAAAAABI8/kX7WDpLf0
>
> > zA/s1600/381622_2776255321078_1098954157_2968840_574378480_n.jpg
>
>
>
> That's Germany (overseas). Doesn't count.
>

No? Because they felt it necessary to ride the platforms in Germany? Or do you want to reduce the list...:)

>
>
> > We need to also consider that it's been 50 years and many of the
>
> > older
>
> > photos before the murder wouldn't be kept online anymore, but the day
>
> > of the murder there were plenty, except that day there was no one on
>
> > the platforms.
>
> >
>
>
>
>

> Nonsense. There are hundreds of JFK motorcade photos pre-November 1963. The
>
> reason you can't find any evidence of agents on the bumpers in the US,
>
> aside from Tampa? Because it wasn't standard protocol.

What I didn't find were almost ANY pictures of JFK in the limo before
murder day.

[mainframetech]

Arrogance? You have some sort of proof of JFK acting arrogant? The SS
agents said he was easy to get along with, and they seemed to like him.
So you need to have information from somewhere else to oppose that.

Check the ARRB interview of Floyd Boring.

Chris

[mainframetech]

All the government selected panels did what they were supposed to.
They tried to shut up the public from complaining about the conspiracy.
In one case (HSCA) they even agreed that there may have been a
conspiracy...of course, no investigation for the missing conspirators was
ever started, so that was a scam.

Chris

[news]

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

news:539673ed$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu:

Correct. If you don't want to "tire the agents out," you sit them or
stand them on the backup car. You don't make them crouch on the bumper of
JFK's limo for 28 miles. But that's exactly what he did, and it makes no
sense.

[Anthony Marsh]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but you CAN shoot the President even
if Clint Hill is protecting him with his body. The Carcano bullet can
easily go through two or three men.

>>
>>
>> Chris
>
>

[Bud]

On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 10:27:21 AM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> On Monday, June 9, 2014 10:10:06 PM UTC-4, Lanny wrote:
>
> > On Monday, June 9, 2014 8:05:22 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > You don't think that Rowley would submit a report with any sort of
>
> >
>
> > > failure or bad news in it do you? And most teams would stick together and
>
> >
>
> > > not mention anything that might be misconstrued at a later time. Rowley
>
> >
>
> > > would see to it that Lawton wouldn't record his confusion:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Is that how it works in your office? If you and a handful of other
>
> >
>
> > employees had irrefutable proof that the top management of your company
>
> >
>
> > had conspired to commit a felony that resulted in actually killing
>
> >
>
> > innocent people or defrauding your clients or customers out of huge sums
>
> >
>
> > of money, would you all just remain quiet because you were told to?
>
> >
>
> > Would it be fair for the rest of us here to assume that your own
>
> >
>
> > commitment to the rule of law and personal ethics is no better than what
>
> >
>
> > you apparently believe is the most likely response of others?
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> If there were a major problem in my department, no one would speak up,
>
> but that changes from office to office. In uniformed ranks it is
>
> stronger, and also in law enforcement it's stronger.

You offer silly hobbyist figuring to bolster silly hobbyist ideas.

>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > As expected, he didn't mention his confusion that we all saw. And yet
>
> >
>
> > > he was with his team when it pulled out, even though he said he was to
>
> >
>
> > > remain at the airport.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Field agents Wagner and Patterson and SA John O'Leary specifically wrote
>
> >
>
> > in their reports that they assisted Lawton with security duties at the
>
> >
>
> > airport while the motorcade was downtown. Wagner and Patterson's reports
>
> >
>
> > were dated the day of the assassination. O'Leary's was dated November 30.
>
> >
>
> > Lawton was at Love Field because that's where his "team" was. That's
>
> >
>
> > where he was assigned. He was never assigned to the motorcade. That is
>
> >
>
> > what the evidence shows apart from any subjective interpretation of his
>
> >
>
> > body language on a silent film clip.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > You can't change what we all saw.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > You don't have a clue as to what you saw.
>
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> and that's your best argument against the confusion caused by ordering
>
> the agent off the limo?
>
>
>
> Chris

You don`t need to show confusion, you need to show intent. And that you
will never be able to show, so what is the point to this silliness?

[Anthony Marsh]

That was what Blaine decided. He was in charge.
Did I say jog? I didn't say how slow the motorcade would go. For short
motorcades the SS agents walked near the limo. Maybe you've never walked
outside your mansion. When I was young and didn't have arthritis I used
to walk charity walkathons such as the Jimmy Fund which were about 20 miles.

The Boston Marathon Jimmy Fund Walk allows participants to follow the
course of the 26.2-mile Boston Marathon to honor friends, family,
co-workers, and patients facing all forms of cancer.

>>>> From comments from many of the agents about JFK, using an
>>>> insulting
>>>> phrase like "ivy league charlatans" was NOT JFK's style. But it's
>>>> important to the LNs to blame JFK for his own murder!
>>>
>>> Of course he played a hand in his own murder. Vain Kennedy insisted
>>> on open limos in a country rife with guns. SS Agents can't outrun a
>>> bullet.
>>>
>>
>> Why even go out at all? Just stay in the underground bunker. Yet I
>> never see you criticize other Presidents who were shot.
>
> Subsequent presidents haven't been stupid enough to ride in slow-moving
> open-air limos for miles and miles. Nowadays, if someone pops you on the
> rope-line or at an event, that's on the SS, not you.
>

The SS changed a lot for the better after Dallas, but attempts are
still made. Sometimes it is only luck or the hand of God which saves the
President. Ford, Reagan and others you don't even know about. Remember
the kook who thought he was shooting at Clinton with the machine gun?

[Bud]

Find out what happened, which they did. Oswald fired his rifle from his
work and killed and injured some people.

> They tried to shut up the public from complaining about the conspiracy.

They felt that presenting facts to the public might satisfy it. Obviously
the overestimated the intelligence of the public.

> In one case (HSCA) they even agreed that there may have been a
>
> conspiracy...

Strange that a governmental panel selected to shut up the public would
do that. Perhaps your ideas about this are just bad.

>of course, no investigation for the missing conspirators was
>
> ever started, so that was a scam.

It was, there were no conspirators to look for. Who would undertake to
do such a thing with Oswald?


>
>
> Chris

[news]

mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:887fc276-8aaa-4a0f...@googlegroups.com:

Technically, no. He wasn't on the presidential protection detail. I also
seriously doubt that he knew of JFK's order in Tampa.

>> > http://www.sott.net/image/image/s7/157884/large/JFK3.jpg
>>
>>
>>
>> That's Tampa (the anamoly). I said BEFORE Tampa.
>>
>>
>>
>> > http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0eiRwbPM1cY/T7f8N28xjkI/AAAAAAAABI8/kX7WDp
>> > Lf0
>>
>> > zA/s1600/381622_2776255321078_1098954157_2968840_574378480_n.jpg
>>
>>
>>
>> That's Germany (overseas). Doesn't count.
>>
>
>
> No? Because they felt it necessary to ride the platforms in Germany?
> Or do you want to reduce the list...:)

Not just Germany but many places overseas. But that was NOT the routine
in the United States. The agents were not on the bumper in Dallas because
99% of the time in domestic motorcades they never were.

>> > We need to also consider that it's been 50 years and many of the
>>
>> > older
>>
>> > photos before the murder wouldn't be kept online anymore, but the
>> > day
>>
>> > of the murder there were plenty, except that day there was no one
>> > on
>>
>> > the platforms.
>>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Nonsense. There are hundreds of JFK motorcade photos pre-November
>> 1963. The
>>
>> reason you can't find any evidence of agents on the bumpers in the
>> US,
>>
>> aside from Tampa? Because it wasn't standard protocol.
>
>
>
> What I didn't find were almost ANY pictures of JFK in the limo
> before
> murder day.

Then you weren't looking hard enough, because there are lots of them.

[news]

mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:b818c32b-3dc9-4e82...@googlegroups.com:

>>
>> What about the front? Or the side? They'd have to be on every side of
>>
>> Kennedy in order to protect him, and there's no way he would have put
>> up
>>
>> with that. When you insist on open limos, you're putting your life at
>>
>> risk. The SS agents are too classy to say that Kennedy's arrogance
>> played
>>
>> a part in his demise, but I'm not.
>
>
>
>
> Arrogance? You have some sort of proof of JFK acting arrogant?
> The SS
> agents said he was easy to get along with, and they seemed to like
> him. So you need to have information from somewhere else to oppose
> that.
>
> Check the ARRB interview of Floyd Boring.
>
> Chris

Whether they liked him has nothing to do with his cavalier approach to his
own personal safety.

[Jason Burke]

Or, gee. Maybe they found out what happened.
Ya think?

[Lanny]

ATSAIC Emory Roberts and SAs Kinney, Roberts, Hill, McIntyre, Ready,
Landis, Bennett and Hickey. Presidential assistants Dave Powers and Ken
O'Donnell were also in the follow-up car.

[Lanny]

On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 10:27:21 AM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:

>

> and that's your best argument against the confusion caused by ordering
>
> the agent off the limo?
>
>
>
> Chris

"Confusion" is what you choose to believe existed on the basis of your
subjective interpretation of the film. Evidence has been presented that
there was no confusion as to what every agents' assignments were. Evidence
has been presented that Lawton's arm gestures were merely in jest. You
simply choose not to believe this evidence.

It is your belief in conspiracy that validates the weight and credibility
of evidence rather than the other way around.

[mainframetech]

Listening to the comments from many of the SS agents about Kennedy and
his way of dealing with the agents, it would seem out of character for
Kennedy to act Vain around them.

Chris

[mainframetech]

That was pretty obvious too. Orders from someone higher up the food
chain.

Chris

[Bud]

What is obvious to a hobbyist doesn`t count for anything.

> Orders from someone higher up the food
>
> chain.

Thats what you are desperate to believe, but you can`t move this issue
forward in any meaningful way.

Funny that you want to apply stringent trial criteria to the evidence
that indicates Oswald`s guilt but the bar is so much lower when it comes
to convicting anyone else.

>
>
> Chris

[mainframetech]

Of course, you're absolutely right. I refuse to believe that the agent
ordered off the limo pacing detail was other than confused. I've been
around humans for many years and I know confusion at orders that conflict
with what he thought was the way things were ordered previously.
"Subjective interpretation"? Of course. Isn't that what you used to
decide whether I was right or wrong? Most people know the same as me when
they see the agent wave his hands in frustration and confusion. You can
come up with memos from bosses trying to cover up all you like, but that's
a human reaction too, especially for a bureaucrat.

I don't know if the ordering off was part of a conspiracy, but it sure
didn't help the situation any.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

He was fatalistic. There was nothing that anybody could do to stop an
assassination.

[Anthony Marsh]

Clint Hill did not crouch on the bumper for 28 miles. The Dallas
motorcade was only 11 miles and Hill went back and forth from the
running board to the bumper about 4 times. Only briefly staying on the
bumper.

[Anthony Marsh]

Go to the JFK Library.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 6/11/2014 10:55 AM, mainframetech wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 7:57:40 PM UTC-4, Lanny wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 10:27:21 AM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> and that's your best argument against the confusion caused by ordering
>>
>>>
>>
>>> the agent off the limo?
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Chris
>>
>>
>>
>> "Confusion" is what you choose to believe existed on the basis of your
>>
>> subjective interpretation of the film. Evidence has been presented that
>>
>> there was no confusion as to what every agents' assignments were. Evidence
>>
>> has been presented that Lawton's arm gestures were merely in jest. You
>>
>> simply choose not to believe this evidence.
>>
>>
>>
>> It is your belief in conspiracy that validates the weight and credibility
>>
>> of evidence rather than the other way around.
>
>
>
> Of course, you're absolutely right. I refuse to believe that the agent
> ordered off the limo pacing detail was other than confused. I've been

Out at love Field those were not pacing details. They only walked next
to the limo until it sped up to start the motorcade. Then they would
jump onto the running boards. That is always the plan.

> around humans for many years and I know confusion at orders that conflict
> with what he thought was the way things were ordered previously.

The order to pull back was not a conflict. It was SOP.

> "Subjective interpretation"? Of course. Isn't that what you used to
> decide whether I was right or wrong? Most people know the same as me when
> they see the agent wave his hands in frustration and confusion. You can
> come up with memos from bosses trying to cover up all you like, but that's
> a human reaction too, especially for a bureaucrat.
>

You don't know what they usually did in all the other motorcades.
Selection bias. You look only at Dallas.

> I don't know if the ordering off was part of a conspiracy, but it sure
> didn't help the situation any.
>

When kooks see incompetence they claim it must be conspiracy.

> Chris
>

[Sandy McCroskey]

On 6/11/14, 10:55 AM, mainframetech wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 7:57:40 PM UTC-4, Lanny wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 10:27:21 AM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> and that's your best argument against the confusion caused by ordering
>>
>>>
>>
>>> the agent off the limo?
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Chris
>>
>>
>>
>> "Confusion" is what you choose to believe existed on the basis of your
>>
>> subjective interpretation of the film. Evidence has been presented that
>>
>> there was no confusion as to what every agents' assignments were. Evidence
>>
>> has been presented that Lawton's arm gestures were merely in jest. You
>>
>> simply choose not to believe this evidence.
>>
>>
>>
>> It is your belief in conspiracy that validates the weight and credibility
>>
>> of evidence rather than the other way around.
>
>
>
> Of course, you're absolutely right. I refuse to believe that the agent
> ordered off the limo pacing detail was other than confused. I've been
> around humans for many years

So when do you report back to whoever sent you?

(Moderators: This is a *joke*.)

[news]

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

news:5397d667$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu:

I feel like we're talking past each other. There were other "long"
motorcades in the US prior to Tampa, but the SS never felt the need to put
agents on the bumper from the beginning to the end of the route. For some
reason, Blaine suddenly changed how they did things. Jogging next to the
limo for ONE mile in a suit and wingtips, let alone 28 miles, was never an
option. So when Blaine said he didn't want to "tire the agents out," I
sincerely doubt he was talking about the agents RUNNING, because that was
never plausible to begin with given the motorcade's extreme length. And it
goes without saying that crouching on a bumper is much more
tiring/uncomfortable than sitting or standing in the backup car.

I think it would help Blaine's credibility if they could find a SS memo
dated BEFORE 11/22/63 which expressed Kennedy's wishes. The December
report was when everyone was in CYA mode, and Kennedy wasn't alive to
contradict them.

[cmikes]

Don't be so hard on Chris. He's slowing working his way up the chain.
In 50 years the CTs have got "someone", "whoever", and "them". Give them
another 50 years and maybe they'll come up with an actual name. Nah,
since Oswald did it by himself, they won't, but they'll keep trying.

[mainframetech]

As usual, you add no facts or useful comments to the discussion. Check
in with bigdog for advice. As a JFK hobbyist, you need some refreshment
now and then.

Chris

[mainframetech]

I don't have any problems giving names that I believe had something to
do with the conspiracy. But few ask. We have LBJ at the head of the
plot, then we have Robert Frazier (FBI) who handled all the evidence and
messed up the chains of custody for some important items. Then as
suspects we have Roy Kellerman who was instrumental in stealing the body
of JFK from Dallas, and some other things he got into. Also Greer the
driver of the limo who stopped it a moment before the kill shot hit JFK
and ended the whole debacle. I believe that a minor part was played by
Jack Ruby, whose name kept popping up in the oddest places. Names for
shooters would include a few, such as Bading in the Dal-Tex building, who
was there supposedly to make a phone call, and had a record and met with
Jack Ruby the night before the murder. The there was James Files, but I
leave that one for others to decide on.

We also have a probably involvement of a guy named Milteer who spoke of
JFK being killed form a shot from a high building, BEFORE the murder. He
was seen in the crowds lining Elm street. He was accused by a retired FBI
agent who says the FBI ignored evidence and did all kinds of things to
cover up any conspiracy:

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

That's a starter list. And if they could be questioned under subpoena
and sworn in, we might get somewhere.


I'm surprised you haven't heard this list before. You must not keep up
with the case often.

Chris