Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Standdown video I saw on the internet.

50 views
Skip to first unread message

circuitbr...@yahoo.com

unread,
Feb 28, 2008, 7:52:43 AM2/28/08
to
I saw a video on the internet about a possible standdown of the Secret
Service Agents in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. If anyone has
seen this video it is pure fiction. This video of the "stand-down" of
the Secret Service is not a stand-down at all. The video is taken
immediately after the limousine is leaving Love Field in Dallas about
40 minutes
before President Kennedy is shot in Dealey Plaza. Dealey Plaza was
still a half hour away. There is a lot of footage of the limousine in
Downtown Dallas (post- Love Field) with Clint Hill on the left rear
step of the trunk on Main Street. It is true that President Kennedy
did not like agents on the rear step of the Presidential Limousine,
which explains why there were not usually agents on the back step of
the limousine. That does not mean anything significant except for the
fact that the agents were persuaded or rather were asked not to stand
on the back step too often during the motorcade routes if it was not
necessary. President Kennedy thought it made visibility to the
President more restrictive with these agents on the back bumper step,
and he wanted the most visibility he could get with the people.
But this video of a "standdown" is irresponsible and not factually
accurate, so I have to comment on it. The proof that this video is not
based on fact is easily explained. In the video the narrator says
that an agent who is running beside the Presidential Limousine (1961
Lincoln Continental -directly in front of the followup car I am
discussing) at Love Field Airport (in Dallas, Texas) is told not to
get on the rear bumper step by Secret Service Agent Emory Roberts (who
is on the passenger seat on the followup car to the Presidential
Limousine-This followup car was a 1956 Cadillac dubbed "Queen Mary").
The agent on the road is seen shrugging his shoulders, and the
narrator suggests that Agent Emory Roberts is signaling for him to
standdown or rather not to provide security to his utmost ability. As
suggested in the video narrative, the shrugging is interpreted as a
complaint by the agent on the road to the command by Agent Roberts to
standdown. Purely fictional. (I suppose what is meant by a "stand-
down" from my interpretation is a passive nonprotection. "Standing" is
probably regarded as utmost protection or on full guard, whereas
"standing-down" is passively letting that guard down). After the
first shrugging of the agent, the agent then does another shrug and
then a last shrug again to the occupants in the followup car as the
limousines move on down the road and turns right. So as I said, the
limousine and the followup Cadillac turn right to exit the Love Field
runway area (where the President's party landed on Air Force One -and
also Air Force Two landed with Vice President Johnson previous to the
President's airplane landing). So the narrative suggests this standing
down in the sequence of events shown on a short clip of a video taken
as the limousine leaves Love Field Airport forty minutes before the
shots were fired in Dealey Plaza. I think this video is the WFAA
footage of the motorcade at Love Field.
My take on the video is this..The agent in question who is
running next to GG-300 (President Kennedy limousine) is not even from
the followup car. When one looks at the followup Cadillac -two agents
are on the running boards on each side of the 1956 limousine which is
accurate and normal.Where was this agent to go? The two agents on the
left running board
were Clint Hill and Bill McIntyre, the two agents on the right running
board were John Ready on the front and Landis behind him- and they are
both seen in the video. And in the car can be seen Agent George Hickey
in the left back seat and Agent Glen Bennett in the right rear seat.
On the jump seats in front of Hickey and Bennett in the followup car
are Kenny ODonnell and Dave Powers- aides to President Kennedy. And in
the front seat Sam Kinney and Emory Roberts. All the agents from the
followup car which I mention here -which were in Dealey Plaza in the
followup car during the assassination of President Kennedy 40 minutes
later,are in the car in the video here at Love Field before the
President was shot. No other agents were in the car at Dealey Plaza
during the shooting, that were not in the car at Love Field during the
said video clip.
This main Secret Service agent (on the right side of the limousine on
the road at Love Field) which this video describes as being ordered to
stand down is pointed out numerous times, and is the pivotal character
in this clip which the narrative suggests is a standdown. This agent
is not in the followup car in Dealey Plaza and was not in the follow
up car during the motorcade drive through the streets of Dallas at
anytime that day. So, he was not an agent who was in the followup car
and was not assigned to it. He was just directing the limousine out of
Love Field to start the motorcade. So he leads the car to the entrance
way from the airport gate area where Air Force One lands, and the
limousine goes to this roadway (where the limousine turns right
onto)which then goes out in the direction of Mockingbird Lane which
then starts the motorcade route to Lemmon ave and so forth. How can
you make a standdown out of that?
In short, every person who should be in the follow up (Queen Mary
-1956 Cadillac) car for the motorcade can be seen in the video in the
actual followup car in Love Field when the video clip shows what the
narrator calls a standdown. Every Agent and Aide who is in the
followup car at Love Field in Dallas is in the followup car in Dealey
Plaza during the assassination forty minutes later, and the running
boards are full with two agents on each running board. So no more
agents can be on the followup car in either Love Field or Dealey
Plaza. That right there makes this"standdown" video non-factual. Why
would another agent be assigned to stand on the step if he was not
from the followup car? Maybe people who do not know the case will see
this and say wow a standdown. But all you have to do is know the
agents and aides in the followup car and this video is easily
discounted. The agent who is running and stops is not in the process
of jumping on the back of GG-300 (Presidential Limousine)
back step- he seems to be signaling to the followup car shrugging his
shoulder as if to say everything is perfect and very relaxed. I have
seen this video many times. The agent shrugs like saying"nothing for
me to do since everything is perfect and the crowd is perfect". You
can almost see him smiling to the other agents in a very relaxed way.
He stops right before the limousine turns right to exit the airport on
this small service road leading to the front of the airport and
Mockingbird lane. So his job was done directing the limousine from the
runway area. So he is saying " everything good and shrugging to
ODonnell. How is that a "standdown" or conspiracy? He is signaling to
ODonnell who is a good friend of President Kennedy. ODonnell can be
seen signaling back in a very relaxed way. Things at that point were
good as for scheduling of speeches and events that day. ODonnell and
Powers would have been happy the cavalcade was on time to make it to
the Trade Mart at 12:30 PM, and later to Austin that evening for the
Democratic fundraiser. As it turned out the motorcade was only 5
minutes behind schedule when it was in Dealey Plaza as Dave Powers had
noted many times in interviews. The Trade Mart was five minutes from
Dealey Plaza. No one knew shots would be fired in Dealey Plaza prior
to 12:30 noontime except Lee Harvey Oswald. But my point about the
"standdown" video is that it is easily discounted and fiction based on
the occupants of the 1956 Cadillac followup car. The 1956 Cadillac
incidentally and obviously followed the 1961 Lincoln Continental
Limousine which contained President and Mrs. Kennedy, Governor and
Mrs. Connally, Bill Greer and Roy Kellerman. Sincerly, Mark Giolli

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delicious ideas to please the pickiest eaters. Watch the video on AOL
Living

Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 28, 2008, 10:27:03 AM2/28/08
to
In article <df8378fb-42da-455e...@62g2000hsn.googlegroups.com>,
circuitbr...@yahoo.com says...

>
>I saw a video on the internet about a possible standdown of the Secret
>Service Agents in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.

Nothing "possible" about it. It's plainly obvious.

Embarrassing, isn't it?


>If anyone has seen this video it is pure fiction.


A LNT'er has no other option other than to be dishonest.

The film is what it is - and the description is accurate.


>This video of the "stand-down" of
>the Secret Service is not a stand-down at all.


Just how else do you describe agents being taken off of their predefined duties?


>The video is taken
>immediately after the limousine is leaving Love Field in Dallas about
>40 minutes before President Kennedy is shot in Dealey Plaza. Dealey Plaza was
>still a half hour away.


Do you presume that it would only be damaging to the Secret Service if they had
done this 5 minutes before Dealey Plaza? 30 seconds? Where do *YOU* draw the
line?


>There is a lot of footage of the limousine in
>Downtown Dallas (post- Love Field) with Clint Hill on the left rear
>step of the trunk on Main Street.

Clint Hill was not the assigned agent. He wasn't even *scheduled* to go on the
Texas trip... as I recall, he was asked by Jackie.


>It is true that President Kennedy
>did not like agents on the rear step of the Presidential Limousine,

No, it's *NOT* true. Palamara has compiled a good collection of evidence on
this point - illustrating that this factoid came ultimately from just one man,
SS Agent Boring - WHO DENIED IT!


>which explains why there were not usually agents on the back step of
>the limousine.

Supporting a factoid with an untruth?

>That does not mean anything significant except for the
>fact that the agents were persuaded or rather were asked not to stand
>on the back step too often during the motorcade routes if it was not
>necessary.

Untrue.


>President Kennedy thought it made visibility to the
>President more restrictive with these agents on the back bumper step,
>and he wanted the most visibility he could get with the people.

Pure fiction.

>But this video of a "standdown" is irresponsible and not factually
>accurate, so I have to comment on it. The proof that this video is not
>based on fact is easily explained. In the video the narrator says
>that an agent who is running beside the Presidential Limousine (1961
>Lincoln Continental -directly in front of the followup car I am
>discussing) at Love Field Airport (in Dallas, Texas) is told not to
>get on the rear bumper step by Secret Service Agent Emory Roberts (who
>is on the passenger seat on the followup car to the Presidential
>Limousine-This followup car was a 1956 Cadillac dubbed "Queen Mary").
>The agent on the road is seen shrugging his shoulders, and the
>narrator suggests that Agent Emory Roberts is signaling for him to
>standdown or rather not to provide security to his utmost ability. As
>suggested in the video narrative, the shrugging is interpreted as a
>complaint by the agent on the road to the command by Agent Roberts to
>standdown. Purely fictional.

It is what it is - you can't explain it. The *FACT* is that this agent was
scheduled to be on the rear of JFK's side of the limo - and he was left at the
airfield.

*THAT* is a fact, and nothing you can do will obviate it.


>(I suppose what is meant by a "stand-
>down" from my interpretation is a passive nonprotection. "Standing" is
>probably regarded as utmost protection or on full guard, whereas
>"standing-down" is passively letting that guard down).

Presumably, you've never served in the military. This is *exactly* the meaning
of a standdown.

Nor is there anything "passive" about it.

>After the
>first shrugging of the agent, the agent then does another shrug and
>then a last shrug again to the occupants in the followup car as the
>limousines move on down the road and turns right.

Wonderfully deficient description... merely "shrugging"... every lurker should
view it for themselves, and see if *THEY* would describe it as "shrugging".

"Incredulity" would be a tad more accurate.


>So as I said, the
>limousine and the followup Cadillac turn right to exit the Love Field
>runway area (where the President's party landed on Air Force One -and
>also Air Force Two landed with Vice President Johnson previous to the
>President's airplane landing). So the narrative suggests this standing
>down in the sequence of events shown on a short clip of a video taken
>as the limousine leaves Love Field Airport forty minutes before the
>shots were fired in Dealey Plaza.

Yep, that's *exactly* what it was.

Visits are preplanned beginning months in advance... yet here we are, 40 minutes
before JFK's death, and they're making unwarranted *changes* in plan. Just
what, do you presume, leaving two SS agents at the airport actually
accomplished? Was the SS afraid of terrorist infiltration of Airforce One?
Deciding at the last minute that the Airport needed protection more than the
President did?

What is noticeably absent from this post IS ANY DESCRIPTION THAT EXPLAINS *WHY*
THIS IS HAPPENING. Tis easy, of course, from a CT'ers viewpoint to describe and
*EXPLAIN* these actions ... not so easy for a LNT'er, indeed; no attempt was
made here in this post.

>I think this video is the WFAA
>footage of the motorcade at Love Field.
> My take on the video is this..The agent in question who is
>running next to GG-300 (President Kennedy limousine) is not even from
>the followup car. When one looks at the followup Cadillac -two agents
>are on the running boards on each side of the 1956 limousine which is
>accurate and normal.Where was this agent to go?

Perhaps where he was going when he was pulled off?

>The two agents on the
>left running board
>were Clint Hill and Bill McIntyre, the two agents on the right running
>board were John Ready on the front and Landis behind him- and they are
>both seen in the video. And in the car can be seen Agent George Hickey
>in the left back seat and Agent Glen Bennett in the right rear seat.
>On the jump seats in front of Hickey and Bennett in the followup car
>are Kenny ODonnell and Dave Powers- aides to President Kennedy. And in
>the front seat Sam Kinney and Emory Roberts. All the agents from the
>followup car which I mention here -which were in Dealey Plaza in the
>followup car during the assassination of President Kennedy 40 minutes
>later,are in the car in the video here at Love Field before the
>President was shot. No other agents were in the car at Dealey Plaza
>during the shooting, that were not in the car at Love Field during the
>said video clip.

I'm sure you thought you had a point with all this... but the fact still remains
that agents were pulled off of their pre-planned and assigned jobs at what
amounts to 'the last minute'.


>This main Secret Service agent (on the right side of the limousine on
>the road at Love Field) which this video describes as being ordered to
>stand down is pointed out numerous times, and is the pivotal character
>in this clip which the narrative suggests is a standdown. This agent
>is not in the followup car in Dealey Plaza and was not in the follow
>up car during the motorcade drive through the streets of Dallas at
>anytime that day.

Of course not - he was ordered *OFF* of his pre-planned assigned location.

>So, he was not an agent who was in the followup car
>and was not assigned to it.

Nope... nor was he assigned to the press car. Nor was he assigned to the lead
car... he was assigned WHERE HE WAS TAKEN OFF.

>He was just directing the limousine out of
>Love Field to start the motorcade.


Pretty neat "leading" when he's following the limo.


>So he leads the car to the entrance
>way from the airport gate area where Air Force One lands, and the
>limousine goes to this roadway (where the limousine turns right
>onto)which then goes out in the direction of Mockingbird Lane which
>then starts the motorcade route to Lemmon ave and so forth. How can
>you make a standdown out of that?

How can you lie about him "leading" the limo when he never did this? Just why
would you presume that a Washington based SS agent would be needed to "lead" the
Presidential limo in a strange city when you had the local police there?


> In short, every person who should be in the follow up (Queen Mary
>-1956 Cadillac) car for the motorcade can be seen in the video in the
>actual followup car in Love Field when the video clip shows what the
>narrator calls a standdown.

Everyone, that is, except for the two agents pulled off at the last minute.

>Every Agent and Aide who is in the
>followup car at Love Field in Dallas is in the followup car in Dealey
>Plaza during the assassination forty minutes later, and the running
>boards are full with two agents on each running board.

However, the assigned agents for the rear of the Presidential limo aren't there.

They were told to standdown.


>So no more
>agents can be on the followup car in either Love Field or Dealey
>Plaza.

This has no bearing on the agents assigned to the rear of JFK's limo.


> That right there makes this"standdown" video non-factual.


Poor logic.


>Why would another agent be assigned to stand on the step if he was not
>from the followup car?

Because he wasn't assigned to the followup car.

>Maybe people who do not know the case will see
>this and say wow a standdown. But all you have to do is know the
>agents and aides in the followup car and this video is easily
>discounted.

Only by LNT'ers who are easily misled.

Honest people can see it quite clearly.


>The agent who is running and stops is not in the process
>of jumping on the back of GG-300 (Presidential Limousine)
>back step- he seems to be signaling to the followup car shrugging his
>shoulder as if to say everything is perfect and very relaxed.

That, of course, is an outright lie. Why bother to lie? Is it because you
believe that lurkers who haven't seen the film won't bother to go look for it?

I noticed that you didn't cite it.


>I have
>seen this video many times. The agent shrugs like saying"nothing for
>me to do since everything is perfect and the crowd is perfect".

And you're a liar, too.


>You can almost see him smiling to the other agents in a very relaxed way.

Again, another lie.


>He stops right before the limousine turns right to exit the airport on
>this small service road leading to the front of the airport and
>Mockingbird lane. So his job was done directing the limousine from the
>runway area.

And yet, his "directing" consisted of *FOLLOWING* the limo.

Silly on the face of it, but this is expected of LNT'ers and Liars.


>So he is saying " everything good and shrugging to
>ODonnell.

There's no reason whatsoever for him to be "shrugging" to *ODonnell*.

ODonnell was merely one of the politicians to this agent.


>How is that a "standdown" or conspiracy?

It still is. Your lies haven't changed the facts.


>He is signaling to
>ODonnell who is a good friend of President Kennedy. ODonnell can be
>seen signaling back in a very relaxed way. Things at that point were
>good as for scheduling of speeches and events that day. ODonnell and
>Powers would have been happy the cavalcade was on time to make it to
>the Trade Mart at 12:30 PM, and later to Austin that evening for the
>Democratic fundraiser. As it turned out the motorcade was only 5
>minutes behind schedule when it was in Dealey Plaza as Dave Powers had
>noted many times in interviews. The Trade Mart was five minutes from
>Dealey Plaza. No one knew shots would be fired in Dealey Plaza prior
>to 12:30 noontime except Lee Harvey Oswald.


That *is* the standard LNT'er presumption.

The evidence shows otherwise...


>But my point about the
>"standdown" video is that it is easily discounted and fiction based on
>the occupants of the 1956 Cadillac followup car.

No, there wasn't *anyone* in the followup car other than the driver. I can
prove this because the press car 15 cars back was completely full, and couldn't
have held another man.

(This is the sort of logic that LNT'ers & liars use...)


>The 1956 Cadillac
>incidentally and obviously followed the 1961 Lincoln Continental
>Limousine which contained President and Mrs. Kennedy, Governor and
>Mrs. Connally, Bill Greer and Roy Kellerman.

And this means what, exactly?


> Sincerly, Mark Giolli


Good to see "sincere" liars back to spout their lies. The film was so
embarrassing to you that you failed to cite it, I notice.

Would you care to provide a link so that lurkers can judge your description of
the film for themselves?

Walt

unread,
Feb 28, 2008, 11:17:08 AM2/28/08
to
On 28 Feb, 09:27, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
> In article <df8378fb-42da-455e-9d77-b3f16bf49...@62g2000hsn.googlegroups.com>,
> circuitbreaker1...@yahoo.com says...

>
>
>
> >I saw a video on the internet about a possible standdown of the Secret
> >Service Agents in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.
>
> Nothing "possible" about it.  It's plainly obvious.

Excellent point by point rebuttal, Ben...... When I read Open
Circuitbreaker's post, was hoping someone who is more proficient at
the keyboard than I, would tear it up. Good job.

> believe that lurkers who ...
>
> read more »

Walt

unread,
Feb 28, 2008, 11:35:37 AM2/28/08
to

What an outrageous misrepresentation of the Secret Sevice man's body
language.....Anybody who has viewed that video knows that you are a
liar, Mark.

His bodylanguage isn't merely a dismissive "shrug" it clearly is an
incredulous and urgent questioning of Emory Robert's order. His
bodylanguage clearly reads " What the Hell's going on???" ..... "I was
assigned to ride on the right rear bumper of the Lincoln, when the
decision was made to leave the protective top off the car, and now at
the last minute you're telling me that the President doesn't need to
be protected"??? ARE YOU CRAZY??!!


How is that a "standdown" or conspiracy?  He is signaling to
> ODonnell who is a good friend of President Kennedy. ODonnell can be
> seen signaling back in a very relaxed way. Things at that point were
> good as for scheduling of speeches and events that day. ODonnell and
> Powers would have been happy the cavalcade was on time to make it to
> the Trade Mart  at 12:30 PM, and later to Austin that evening for the
> Democratic fundraiser.  As it turned out the motorcade was only 5
> minutes behind schedule when it was in Dealey Plaza as Dave Powers had
> noted many times in interviews. The Trade Mart was five minutes from
> Dealey Plaza. No one knew shots would be fired in Dealey Plaza prior
> to 12:30 noontime except Lee Harvey Oswald. But my point about the
> "standdown" video is that it is easily discounted and fiction based on
> the occupants of the 1956 Cadillac followup car. The 1956 Cadillac
> incidentally and obviously followed the 1961 Lincoln Continental
> Limousine which contained President and Mrs. Kennedy, Governor and
> Mrs. Connally, Bill Greer and Roy Kellerman.   Sincerly, Mark Giolli
>

> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­-----

Gil Jesus

unread,
Feb 28, 2008, 5:04:03 PM2/28/08
to
You know so much about this, you don't even know the name of the SS
agent who stood with his arms out.

It was Henry Rybka.

And it's OBVIOUS from the video that Roberts is motioning him away
from the rear bumper.

Any idiot can see that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QAWiIRgx0g

Here's some more info for you "circuitbrealer":

The President doesn't have the final say on the level of protection he
is given. That includes where the agents stand and where the
motorcycles ride.

http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/03/VP/11-VP.html


In Berlin, "Kennedy allowed" agents on the rear bumpers AND
motorcycles on the side of his limo:

http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1L4qksf6dQ6lOv4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/

AND he "allowed" a General to ride in the front seat

http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1L*4gdfp4H8j3v4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/


In Tampa, "Kennedy allowed" agents to ride on the rear of his limo and
the General to ride in the front seat:

http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1LwP3N679*T7zv4xQp5Fd3Ig=/large/


Did you know that the Secret Service removed the motorcycle
escorts from the sides of the limousine the night before the
assassination ?

Did you know that the Secret Service reduced the number of
motorcycles and moved them back to the rear quarters of the limo ?

Did you know that JOHNSON'S Secret Service detail told the Dallas
motorcycle cops while they were still at Love Field to hold their
positions "no matter what happened" ?

Did you know that the Secret Service removed the general from the
front seat of the limousine on the morning of the assassination ?

Did you know that when the shooting started, agents were ordered
not to move ?

Did you know that when the shooting started, agents looked
"casually" around ?

Did you know that when the shooting started, the driver slowed
the limo down ?

Did you know that drinking while on travel was a violation of
Secret Service regulations ?

maybe you should go to youtube and look at the secret service videos
there.

or you can look at mine from the witnesses who were THERE and in their
OWN words :

www.youtube.com/GJJdude


David Von Pein

unread,
Feb 28, 2008, 5:30:36 PM2/28/08
to


www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/2e007979d8d7272f


>>> "What an outrageous misrepresentation of the Secret Sevice man's body language. .... His body language isn't merely a dismissive "shrug"; it clearly is an incredulous and urgent questioning of Emory Roberts' order. His body language clearly reads "What the Hell's going on???" " <<<


A person who has studied this matter in pretty good depth--Gary Mack
(at least I'm fairly sure it was Gary who said this; if it wasn't
Gary, I apologize to him)--has stated that it's his belief that Agent
Henry Rybka (the shoulder-shrugging Secret Service agent who was left
at Love Field) was merely kidding around in a playful manner with the
other SS agents in the Queen Mary follow-up car.

Anyone who has a copy of the inimitable 1964 United Artists
documentary film "FOUR DAYS IN NOVEMBER" can watch (in good-quality
form) the entire uncut "arm-shrugging" WFAA-TV sequence featuring
Rybka.

"Four Days" includes a goodly amount of WFAA's videotaped footage of
JFK's Love Field arrival. There are some edits and splices of that
airport footage made by United Artists for the "Four Days" movie, but
the Rybka sequence has not been edited down or spliced in any way.
(Which seems kind of strange to me if UA and/or David Wolper or any of
the "Four Days" moviemakers had been on some "cover-up" or "LN
propaganda" mission, as some CTers seem to actually believe was true.)

And on a big-screen TV, it does look as though Agent Rybka has a bit
of a smile on his face as he's "shrugging" and looking toward the
other agents in the Queen Mary vehicle.


CLIP OF RYBKA AT LOVE FIELD (VIA YOUTUBE.COM)(crappy quality though;
the "Four Days In November" footage is much better):
http://youtube.com/watch?v=XY02Qkuc_f8

Now, it's possible that Rybka was BOTH confused AND "playful" (in a
sense) when we he see him shrugging his shoulders and waving his arms
at Love Field as JFK's limo leaves the airport.

But one thing's a certainty: Nobody on this Earth can PROVE that the
"Rybka Incident" at Love Field was part of some sort of "Secret
Service Standdown" or was part of some "plot" to kill the President by
the SS or any other authorities in Dallas on November 22, 1963.

The only thing that CTers can do with this Rybka event is what they
also do with pretty much everything connected with this whole case --
SPECULATE.

And the CTer speculations and guesswork always add up to some kind of
covert "plot" of some ilk. Naturally. Because a CTer refuses to
believe that ANY incident (or evidence) connected with 11/22/63 could
be "innocent" in nature. Everything MUST lead to the endzone marked
"Conspiracy".

To a CTer, Rybka's actions at Love Field couldn't possibly be looked
upon as anything BUT "conspiratorial" in some fashion (not on Rybka's
part, of course, but "conspiratorial" on the part of Emory Roberts or
any other people who might be looked at sideways by CTers regarding
this airport incident).*

* = It does seem kind of odd to me, though, if a "plot"/"standdown"
was afoot on Nov. 22nd, that the SS waited until the last minute to
coordinate parts of the supposed "standdown" by "waving off" Rybka at
the 11th hour at Love Field after the cars had already begun to roll.

But, apparently that "last minute" kind of angle doesn't seem odd or
unusual to CTers at all. Nor do CTers evidently think it was strange
to have a critical part of the so-called "standdown" (per the CT POV)
taking place at a time when the Secret Service should have known they
were probably being CAPTURED ON LIVE TELEVISION in the act of
performing a key part of the so-called "standdown".

I guess Roberts, et al, just didn't care about part of the "plot"
being potentially CAUGHT ON TAPE/FILM by WFAA-TV (or by anybody else
who might have had a camera pointed at Rybka at approx. 11:50 AM on
Nov. 22 at Love Field).

But when we dive back into the "Reality Pool" (i.e., the pool where
Occam and his Razor usually rule, and where the ORDINARY trumps and
defeats the EXTRAORDINARY in most instances), Emory Roberts' actions
and the actions of Agent Henry Rybka aren't so "covert" or difficult
to figure out at all.

And it's not hard to figure out WHY Roberts and the rest of the Secret
Service didn't care about being seen on live TV during the Rybka
"wave off". The reason they DIDN'T CARE about the rolling TV cameras
(and other potential cameras that might have been filming them) is, of
course, because THE SECRET SERVICE WASN'T DOING ANYTHING WRONG OR
"COVERT" at Love Field on November 22.

And innocent people (i.e., people who aren't engaging in plots to kill
the very President they are all sworn to protect with their own lives)
don't have anything to HIDE.

Therefore nothing was hidden from the TV cameras at Love
Field....because every single thing that was going on regarding the SS
that day at the airport was totally INNOCENT and NON-COVERT in nature.

And no CTer alive can possibly prove otherwise.

Plus.....

There's the fact that Rybka's absence during the motorcade drive
through Dallas did not result in Queen Mary being ONE AGENT SHORT. As
can easily be seen via the Altgens and Willis photos below, the
MAXIMUM number of agents (8) are riding in the Queen Mary car in
Dealey Plaza, with the full complement of FOUR AGENTS on the two
running boards. .....


http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/altgens.jpg

http://www3.baylor.edu/Library/BCPM/JFK/Photos/JFK%20Motorcade%202%20Large.jpg


Plus.....

Via other films and photos taken during pre-November 22nd JFK
motorcades, it becomes very obvious that the security arrangements
made by the SS on 11/22/63 in Dallas were not substantially DIFFERENT
from other motorcades that Kennedy participated in prior to November
22.

I.E.:

There was not ALWAYS a Secret Service agent riding on the rear bumper
of JFK's limousine. Sometimes there were agents on the running boards,
but on many other occasions there were not.

Here are three photographed instances where there were no agents on
either of the bumpers of Kennedy's limo (even amidst heavy crowds):


http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/0/0c/Photo_jfkl-01_0130-AR-7956-1B.jpg

http://media.abqtrib.com/albq/content/img/photos/2007/03/15/031507_KENNEDY_t600.jpg


http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/Hawaii2.jpg

So HOW can conspiracy theorists possibly claim that the motorcade
security in Dallas was "lax" or "different" or "not up to previous
standards" or whatever the CTers say to try and prop up the ridiculous
notion that the United States Secret Service was actually involved in
some kind of plot to murder the President they'd been protecting with
their own lives for almost three years (and/or: the SS just stood by
watching while deliberately doing nothing to aid JFK after the
shooting began in Dealey Plaza)?

That's just silly beyond all possible belief.


www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7b632e38c4bd6225


www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

David Von Pein

unread,
Feb 28, 2008, 5:52:21 PM2/28/08
to


www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/07bca8d506ce87c7/7b632e38c4bd6225?#7b632e38c4bd6225

www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/07bca8d506ce87c7


>>> "The Conspirators selected the luncheon site / motorcade route." <<<


Which means, per the CT-Kook named Gilbert who wrote the nonsense
quoted above, that Kenneth O'Donnell (President Kennedy's very good
friend and personal aide) was one of the MAIN "conspirators", because
it was Mr. O'Donnell, like it or not, who put the final stamp of
approval on the Trade Mart as the site for the November 22 Dallas
luncheon (Warren Report, Page 31). .....

WR; Pg. 31:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0028a.htm

Governor Connally would also have to be considered pretty high up on
the "conspirator" list too, if Gil The Kook is to be believed, because
Connally was pushing hard for the Trade Mart as the luncheon location
in the weeks leading up to 11/22/63.


Does Gil really want to call both O'Donnell and Connally
"conspirators" in a plot to kill JFK in Dallas?


If not, did the real "conspirators" who, according to Gil, "selected
the luncheon site" (and, hence, in an indirect way would have selected
the motorcade route as well) just get extremely lucky when both John
Connally (a shooting victim himself on 11/22) and Ken O'Donnell just
happened to also want the luncheon to be held at the same place where
these unknown, unnamed "conspirators" wanted it to be held, so that
JFK would drive right in front of the building where the proverbial
"patsy" was located?


Anyway, I think it's fairly obvious that Gil is an idiot when it comes
to this completely-unsupportable statement that he uttered: "The
Conspirators selected the luncheon site / motorcade route".


>>> "The Conspirators removed the President's protection." <<<


I wonder if we can still include O'Donnell and Connally amongst "The
Conspirators" when it comes to this second goofball statement on Gil's
list of unsupportable feces?

Fact is, of course, that no "protection" was removed in Dallas. The
security measures taken by the DPD, in fact, were considered by many
people to be unprecedented in size and scope, with virtually every DPD
officer being on duty in some capacity in Dallas on November 22.

Henry Rybka's "What's Up?" shoulder-shrugging incident at Love Field
has been propped up by some CTers as proof that JFK's motorcade was
lacking in essential security measures on 11/22.

This, of course, is ridiculous, because the Queen Mary SS follow-up
car was stuffed full with Secret Service agents even AFTER the arm-
flailing Rybka was left abandoned at the airport when the parade
commenced.

Do CTers really think Rybka was planning on running alongside 100-X
for the entire drive to the Trade Mart? Or that he was planning on
riding the rear bumper of the limo during the Stemmons Freeway portion
of the drive to the Mart (which would surely involve speeds that would
make it undesirable to have agents riding on those back steps of the
car at such times)?


Point being -- It's my belief that Rybka was never assigned to the
FULL MOTORCADE at all. I think he was probably an extra agent who was
at Love Field for the purpose of providing additional SS security at
the airport ONLY, but not for the motorcade drive through Dallas.

This guess of mine becomes even more obvious when we take note of the
fact that the SS car that drove behind 100-X, even without Rybka's
presence there, was jam-packed with the maximum number of agents (8)
that would fit inside that car, including the maximum of 4 agents on
the running boards.*

* = Unless CTers now want to say that Dave Powers and Kenny O'Donnell
were really not supposed to be riding in that SS car, and that there
really should have been ten SS agents in the Queen Mary on 11/22,
instead of only eight. Do CTers want to travel down that path now?

http://www3.baylor.edu/Library/BCPM/JFK/Photos/JFK%20Motorcade%202%20Large.jpg

>>> "The Conspirators arrested the patsy." <<<


So, now the kook has expanded the "conspirators" list considerably
from where it was after just Gil's first hunk of idiocy above, which
is an item that deals with the motorcade route and the luncheon site,
which are things that the DPD certainly wasn't directly responsible
for selecting at all.

But this "arrested the patsy" item certainly means that Gil wants to
point an accusing finger of conspiratorial guilt at the Dallas Police
Department directly....because it was the DPD, after all, who arrested
Lee Harvey Oswald in the Texas Theater.


Let's see how many hundreds more "conspirators" Gil will include in
the mix before he poops out. Should be amusing. (Stupid as all get
out, but amusing nonetheless.)


>>> "The Conspirators manufactured the "evidence"." <<<

With this item above, it would seem that the "conspirator" team that
Gil The Mega-Kook imagines existed in November 1963 now includes the
following individuals and organizations:

Ken O'Donnell, John Connally, the DPD, the Dallas Sheriff's
Department, the Secret Service, the FBI, the United States Postal
Service (Harry D. Holmes specifically), Klein's Sporting Goods, Inc.
of Chicago, Illinois (William J. Waldman specifically), Seaport-
Traders, Inc. of Los Angeles, California (Heinz W. Michaelis
specifically), plus many other people who would have had a hand in the
"evidence" which currently exists in the official record connected to
the murder cases of both John F. Kennedy and J.D. Tippit.


To repeat the obvious -- Gil is an idiot.


>>> "The Conspirators killed the patsy." <<<

Goodie, another addition to the above-mentioned list of "Conspirators"
-- we get to add Jack Ruby's name to the ever-growing list of
plotters/
henchmen. Lovely.

Plus: you can bet your last greenback that "Gilbert The K Word" is
implying here that "The Mob" was directly behind the death of Oswald
on 11/24/63. (Gil wouldn't be worth a damn as an "Anybody But Oswald"
conspiracy-loving kook if he left the Mafia off of his list of
plotters.)

So, with the Mob added into the mix too, we've now got still more
people involved in the assassination plot in '63. As Vince Bugliosi
once said...."Where did all of these conspirators get together to plot
the assassination -- Madison Square Garden?"


Pretty soon Gil will need the old Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum to
house all of his "Conspirators". (The Coliseum can currently seat
92,516 people, so it MIGHT be barely large enough to hold all of Gil's
plotters....but I wouldn't bet on it.)

>>> "The Conspirators destroyed evidence." <<<


Since Gil The Nutcase won't actually NAME any of the "Conspirators" he
imagines existed in '63, I'll just have to do some surmising regarding
their identities.

This "destroyed evidence" item, at least in part (from Gil's screwy
POV, that is) probably refers to Dallas FBI agent James Hosty and
JFK's leading autopsy doctor, James Humes.

Hosty did, indeed, destroy a note that was apparently written by Lee
Oswald a few weeks prior to JFK's assassination....and Dr. Humes
definitely burned some of the original autopsy materials in his own
home fireplace (and he ADMITTED to having done so, which is a very
strange thing to do IF HE WAS ACTUALLY TRYING TO "COVER UP" SOMETHING
CONSPIRATORIAL IN NATURE).

But, of course, the context in which Hosty and Humes "destroyed" those
items has been mangled and skewed (as usual) by the conspiracy
theorists.


Hosty flushed Oswald's note down the toilet because he was ordered to
do so by his boss, Gordon Shanklin. And I think it's fairly obvious
that Shanklin's concerns at that time were to try to salvage some of
the Bureau's waning credibility, seeing as how the Dallas Bureau
(Hosty in particular) knew of Oswald's existence in Dallas prior to
the assassination.

In hindsight, destroying the "Hosty note" was a stupid and needless
thing to do. But it was done anyway. (Partly because Shanklin probably
didn't want the note to come to the attention of his hotheaded boss
named J. Edgar as well.)

Per CTers, the Hosty note probably contained some kind of message
connected with the upcoming assassination of the President. But
there's certainly no proof of that allegation whatsoever. CTers don't
care about the fact they have no proof about something though.

Conspiracy promoters will continue to believe that the note said
something about a plot to kill Kennedy, even though, per Hosty, the
note contained no such information. It was merely a message by Oswald
to Hosty personally, telling Hosty to keep away from Marina and to
stop badgering her (and him).

Humes burned the original draft of the autopsy report in his fireplace
simply because it was INACCURATE as far as the final, correct autopsy
report of President Kennedy was concerned.

When Humes confirmed from Dr. Perry the existence of a bullet hole in
JFK's throat, then the original draft of the report became invalid,
worthless, and just flat-out wrong. So why bother keeping it?

In addition, Humes burned his original notes that he made during the
Bethesda autopsy itself. According to Dr. Humes, those notes were
stained with President Kennedy's blood. So for reasons of taste, Humes
elected to re-copy those notes on fresh paper and destroy the bloody
papers.

Via Humes' HSCA testimony:


MR. CORNWELL -- "The notes are no longer in existence; is that
correct?"

DR. HUMES -- "The original notes which were stained with the blood of
our late President, I felt, were inappropriate to retain to turn in to
anyone in that condition. I felt that people with some peculiar ideas
about the value of that type of material, they might fall into their
hands. I sat down and word for word copied what I had on fresh paper."


http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/hscahume.htm

Via Humes' WC testimony:


DR. HUMES -- "In privacy of my own home, early in the morning of
Sunday, November 24th, I made a draft of this report which I later
revised, and of which this represents the revision. That draft I
personally burned in the fireplace of my recreation room."


http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/humes.htm


To play the "in hindsight" game once again, it probably would have
been wise for Humes to have not burned anything in his fireplace that
November weekend. But, then too, Dr. Humes probably couldn't have
imagined in a thousand lifetimes that there would be kooks like
Gilbert Jesus (et al) who would actually be accusing Humes himself of
deliberately altering the official autopsy report of a deceased U.S.
President, and accusing the good doctor of telling one despicable lie
after another whenever he spoke of JFK's autopsy in the years that
followed 1963.

Unfortunately, however, conspiracy-giddy kooks like Gil Jesus do
exist. So, we can either ignore their idiotic ramblings....or: we can
ridicule them and make as much fun out of them as humanly possible.
Most of the time I choose the former option....but the latter choice
is much more pleasant and rewarding.


Of course, as we all know, Gil's "destroyed evidence" item goes way,
way beyond just Hosty and Humes (in Gil's mind only, that is). Gil
thinks a whole BUNCH of additional stuff was also "destroyed" by his
imagined "Conspiracy Team" of thousands in a massive cover-up plot to
keep the real truth about the events of November '63 from being
revealed.


But coming up with proof that ANYTHING was "destroyed" as part of a
conspiracy to cover up the true facts and circumstances surrounding
the murders of JFK and Officer Tippit is another matter altogether.
Because Gil-Kook can't supply us with a single stitch of that kind of
PROOF in order to back up his allegation that "The Conspirators
destroyed evidence".

But that won't stop Gil from believing it happened just the same.


>>> "The Conspirators altered testimony." <<<
>>> "The Conspirators falsified investigative reports." <<<
>>> "The Conspirators threatened witnesses." <<<
>>> "The Conspirators obstructed justice." <<<
>>> "The Conspirators ignored witnesses." <<<

The above items on Gil's "Imagined List Of Conspiratorial Fantasy"
would indicate that still MORE people (lots more) would have to be
added to the previously-mentioned laundry list of plotters and post-
November 22 cover-up operatives -- chiefly, of course, the entire
Warren Commission panel and the associated counsel and staff members
who worked in conjunction with the Commission.


So, let's now do a "Conspirators" update and see how long the list of
plotters is at this point (per Gil The Kook):

1.) Kenneth P. O'Donnell
2.) John B. Connally
3.) The Dallas Police Department
4.) The Dallas County Sheriff's Department
5.) The Secret Service
6.) The FBI
7.) Jack Ruby
8.) The Mob (Mafia)
9.) Harry Holmes
10.) William Waldman
11.) Heinz Michaelis
12.) James Humes
13.) Earl Warren
14.) Hale Boggs
15.) Gerald Ford
16.) John McCloy
17.) Allen Dulles
18.) Richard Russell
19.) John Cooper
20.) J. Lee Rankin
21.) David Belin
22.) Arlen Specter
23.) Joseph Ball
24.) Mel Eisenberg
25.) Burt Griffin
26.) Wesley Liebeler
27.) William Coleman
28.) Albert Jenner
29.) Norman Redlich
30.) W. David Slawson
31.) Leon Hubert
32.) Howard Willens
33.) Francis Adams
34.) Samuel Stern

Plus: Various additional "WC Staff Members" too.

In addition, I'm sure I could add the names of J. Thornton Boswell and
Pierre A. Finck to the above list of plotters too. There's no sense in
letting those two autopsists off the hook....right Gilbert?

Plus: I'm pretty sure that I could also add the names of many
different members of the HSCA to Gil's list of likely "Conspirators"
too; plus some ARRB members as well. Plus the four doctors who served
on the Clark Panel.

I'm guessing that Gil feels that NOBODY is to be considered "off
limits" or excluded when it comes to potential underhanded evil-doers
with respect to the assassination of John F. Kennedy.


Looks like maybe it'll be "Standing Room Only" at the L.A. Coliseum
after all.

>>> "The result? 26 volumes of LIES paid for by the American taxpayer." <<<

Gil can't even count correctly. He should have said "27 volumes" (the
actual Warren Commission Report plus the 26 supporting volumes).

AN INSTANT REPLAY.....

>>> "The result? 26 volumes of LIES paid for by the American taxpayer." <<<

And the result of Gil Jesus' wholly-unsupportable "The Conspirators
Did This And Did That" forum post? ---

Gil Jesus is an idiot.

(That's about the only definitive "result" I can think of after
reading through Gilbert's speculation-filled post anyway.)


www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

justm...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 28, 2008, 5:53:48 PM2/28/08
to
On Feb 28, 5:30 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/2e007979...
> http://www3.baylor.edu/Library/BCPM/JFK/Photos/JFK%20Motorcade%202%20...

>
> Plus.....
>
> Via other films and photos taken during pre-November 22nd JFK
> motorcades, it becomes very obvious that the security arrangements
> made by the SS on 11/22/63 in Dallas were not substantially DIFFERENT
> from other motorcades that Kennedy participated in prior to November
> 22.
>
> I.E.:
>
> There was not ALWAYS a Secret Service agent riding on the rear bumper
> of JFK's limousine. Sometimes there were agents on the running boards,
> but on many other occasions there were not.
>
> Here are three photographed instances where there were no agents on
> either of the bumpers of Kennedy's limo (even amidst heavy crowds):
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/0/0c/Photo_jfkl-01_0130-AR-795...
>
> http://media.abqtrib.com/albq/content/img/photos/2007/03/15/031507_KE...

>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/Hawaii2.jpg
>
> So HOW can conspiracy theorists possibly claim that the motorcade
> security in Dallas was "lax" or "different" or "not up to previous
> standards" or whatever the CTers say to try and prop up the ridiculous
> notion that the United States Secret Service was actually involved in
> some kind of plot to murder the President they'd been protecting with
> their own lives for almost three years (and/or: the SS just stood by
> watching while deliberately doing nothing to aid JFK after the
> shooting began in Dealey Plaza)?
>
> That's just silly beyond all possible belief.
>
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/7b632e38c4bd6225
>
> www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

Excellent post David, although the prior postings from Chico, Holmes
and Walt show they have heads like concrete and will never accept
anything that makes sense and doesn't lead to conspiracy. Their all
hopeless.
Good job to you too circuitbreaker...you short circuited the 3 of the
stooges with your post.

martyb...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 28, 2008, 7:02:33 PM2/28/08
to
On Feb 28, 2:52 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/07bca8d5...
>
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/07bca8d5...
> http://www3.baylor.edu/Library/BCPM/JFK/Photos/JFK%20Motorcade%202%20...
> Sunday, November 24th, I made a draft of this report which ...
>
> read more »

David,

A good post and I have only two very minor things to add to your
comments.

I've also viewed pictures of other presidential motorcades including
the one in Dallas. If you look at pictures taken from the JFK
motorcade in Berlin you will come away with the impression that
security measures where a bit tighter as they probably should have
been given the close location to the land of the big red menace. In
Dallas in comparison to say the inaugeral parade you will find more
agents closer to JFK.

The second point is in the form of a question. How could you improve
security to a president by having a flipping general riding in the
front seat of a limo? Is he armed, my guess is no. Is he trained in
the protection of the president, probably not. Would he have some
standing in respect to interaction with the SS. No! Does he appear in
all photographs of presidential motorcade. No! He does appear in the
Berlin photos and him being there probably serves purposes other than
protection.

Good post Dave.

Thanks
Marty

Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 28, 2008, 8:51:53 PM2/28/08
to
In article <20d5f228-2dc1-4c23...@n58g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Walt says...

>
>On 28 Feb, 09:27, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
>> In article <df8378fb-42da-455e-9d77-b3f16bf49...@62g2000hsn.googlegroups.c=

>om>,
>> circuitbreaker1...@yahoo.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>> >I saw a video on the internet about a possible standdown of the Secret
>> >Service Agents in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.
>>
>> Nothing "possible" about it. =A0It's plainly obvious.

>
>Excellent point by point rebuttal, Ben...... When I read Open
>Circuitbreaker's post, was hoping someone who is more proficient at
>the keyboard than I, would tear it up. Good job.

Funny thing is... I didn't have time to go looking for that video, and I've not
seen it for at least a few months... so I was going entirely by memory. But
that's all that was needed.

It's not possible for an honest person to view that video clip and describe it
in the same terms as this LNT'er did.

>> Embarrassing, isn't it?
>>
>> >If anyone has seen this video it is pure fiction.
>>
>> A LNT'er has no other option other than to be dishonest.
>>
>> The film is what it is - and the description is accurate.
>>
>> >This video of the "stand-down" of
>> >the Secret Service is not a stand-down at all.
>>

>> Just how else do you describe agents being taken off of their predefined d=


>uties?
>>
>> >The video is taken
>> >immediately after the limousine is leaving Love Field in Dallas about

>> >40 minutes before President Kennedy is shot in Dealey Plaza. Dealey Plaza=


> was
>> >still a half hour away.
>>

>> Do you presume that it would only be damaging to the Secret Service if the=
>y had
>> done this 5 minutes before Dealey Plaza? =A030 seconds? =A0Where do *YOU* =


>draw the
>> line?
>>
>> >There is a lot of footage of the limousine in
>> >Downtown Dallas (post- Love Field) with Clint Hill on the left rear
>> >step of the trunk on Main Street.
>>

>> Clint Hill was not the assigned agent. =A0He wasn't even *scheduled* to go=


> on the
>> Texas trip... as I recall, he was asked by Jackie.
>>
>> >It is true that President Kennedy
>> >did not like agents on the rear step of the Presidential Limousine,
>>

>> No, it's *NOT* true. =A0Palamara has compiled a good collection of evidenc=
>e on
>> this point - illustrating that this factoid came ultimately from just one =


>man,
>> SS Agent Boring - WHO DENIED IT!
>>
>> >which explains why there were not usually agents on the back step of
>> >the limousine.
>>
>> Supporting a factoid with an untruth?
>>
>> >That does not mean anything significant except for the
>> >fact that the agents were persuaded or rather were asked not to stand
>> >on the back step too often during the motorcade routes if it was not
>> >necessary.
>>
>> Untrue.
>>
>> >President Kennedy thought it made visibility to the
>> >President more restrictive with these agents on the back bumper step,
>> >and he wanted the most visibility he could get with the people.
>>
>> Pure fiction.
>>
>> >But this video of a "standdown" is irresponsible and not factually
>> >accurate, so I have to comment on it. The proof that this video is not

>> >based on fact is easily explained. =A0In the video the narrator says


>> >that an agent who is running beside the Presidential Limousine (1961
>> >Lincoln Continental -directly in front of the followup car I am
>> >discussing) at Love Field Airport (in Dallas, Texas) is told not to
>> >get on the rear bumper step by Secret Service Agent Emory Roberts (who
>> >is on the passenger seat on the followup car to the Presidential
>> >Limousine-This followup car was a 1956 Cadillac dubbed "Queen Mary").
>> >The agent on the road is seen shrugging his shoulders, and the
>> >narrator suggests that Agent Emory Roberts is signaling for him to
>> >standdown or rather not to provide security to his utmost ability. As
>> >suggested in the video narrative, the shrugging is interpreted as a
>> >complaint by the agent on the road to the command by Agent Roberts to
>> >standdown. Purely fictional.
>>

>> It is what it is - you can't explain it. =A0The *FACT* is that this agent =
>was
>> scheduled to be on the rear of JFK's side of the limo - and he was left at=


> the
>> airfield.
>>
>> *THAT* is a fact, and nothing you can do will obviate it.
>>
>> >(I suppose what is meant by a "stand-
>> >down" from my interpretation is a passive nonprotection. "Standing" is
>> >probably regarded as utmost protection or on full guard, whereas
>> >"standing-down" is passively letting that guard down).
>>

>> Presumably, you've never served in the military. =A0This is *exactly* the =


>meaning
>> of a standdown.
>>
>> Nor is there anything "passive" about it.
>>
>> >After the
>> >first shrugging of the agent, the agent then does another shrug and
>> >then a last shrug again to the occupants in the followup car as the
>> >limousines move on down the road and turns right.
>>

>> Wonderfully deficient description... merely "shrugging"... every lurker sh=
>ould
>> view it for themselves, and see if *THEY* would describe it as "shrugging"=


>.
>>
>> "Incredulity" would be a tad more accurate.
>>
>> >So as I said, the
>> >limousine and the followup Cadillac turn right to exit the Love Field
>> >runway area (where the President's party landed on Air Force One -and
>> >also Air Force Two landed with Vice President Johnson previous to the
>> >President's airplane landing). So the narrative suggests this standing
>> >down in the sequence of events shown on a short clip of a video taken
>> >as the limousine leaves Love Field Airport forty minutes before the
>> >shots were fired in Dealey Plaza.
>>
>> Yep, that's *exactly* what it was.
>>

>> Visits are preplanned beginning months in advance... yet here we are, 40 m=
>inutes
>> before JFK's death, and they're making unwarranted *changes* in plan. =A0J=


>ust
>> what, do you presume, leaving two SS agents at the airport actually

>> accomplished? =A0Was the SS afraid of terrorist infiltration of Airforce O=
>ne?
>> Deciding at the last minute that the Airport needed protection more than t=
>he
>> President did?
>>
>> What is noticeably absent from this post IS ANY DESCRIPTION THAT EXPLAINS =
>*WHY*
>> THIS IS HAPPENING. =A0Tis easy, of course, from a CT'ers viewpoint to desc=
>ribe and
>> *EXPLAIN* these actions ... not so easy for a LNT'er, indeed; no attempt w=


>as
>> made here in this post.
>>
>> >I think this video is the WFAA
>> >footage of the motorcade at Love Field.

>> > =A0 =A0 =A0My take on the video is this..The agent in question who is


>> >running next to GG-300 (President Kennedy limousine) is not even from
>> >the followup car. When one looks at the followup Cadillac -two agents
>> >are on the running boards on each side of the 1956 limousine which is
>> >accurate and normal.Where was this agent to go?
>>
>> Perhaps where he was going when he was pulled off?
>>
>> >The two agents on the
>> >left running board
>> >were Clint Hill and Bill McIntyre, the two agents on the right running
>> >board were John Ready on the front and Landis behind him- and they are
>> >both seen in the video. And in the car can be seen Agent George Hickey
>> >in the left back seat and Agent Glen Bennett in the right rear seat.
>> >On the jump seats in front of Hickey and Bennett in the followup car
>> >are Kenny ODonnell and Dave Powers- aides to President Kennedy. And in
>> >the front seat Sam Kinney and Emory Roberts. All the agents from the
>> >followup car which I mention here -which were in Dealey Plaza in the
>> >followup car during the assassination of President Kennedy 40 minutes
>> >later,are in the car in the video here at Love Field before the
>> >President was shot. No other agents were in the car at Dealey Plaza
>> >during the shooting, that were not in the car at Love Field during the
>> >said video clip.
>>

>> I'm sure you thought you had a point with all this... but the fact still r=
>emains
>> that agents were pulled off of their pre-planned and assigned jobs at what=


>
>> amounts to 'the last minute'.
>>
>> >This main Secret Service agent (on the right side of the limousine on
>> >the road at Love Field) which this video describes as being ordered to
>> >stand down is pointed out numerous times, and is the pivotal character
>> >in this clip which the narrative suggests is a standdown. This agent
>> >is not in the followup car in Dealey Plaza and was not in the follow
>> >up car during the motorcade drive through the streets of Dallas at
>> >anytime that day.
>>

>> Of course not - he was ordered *OFF* of his pre-planned assigned location.=


>
>>
>> >So, he was not an agent who was in the followup car
>> >and was not assigned to it.
>>

>> Nope... nor was he assigned to the press car. =A0Nor was he assigned to th=


>e lead
>> car... he was assigned WHERE HE WAS TAKEN OFF.
>>
>> >He was just directing the limousine out of
>> >Love Field to start the motorcade.
>>
>> Pretty neat "leading" when he's following the limo.
>>
>> >So he leads the car to the entrance
>> >way from the airport gate area where Air Force One lands, and the
>> >limousine goes to this roadway (where the limousine turns right
>> >onto)which then goes out in the direction of Mockingbird Lane which
>> >then starts the motorcade route to Lemmon ave and so forth. How can
>> >you make a standdown out of that?
>>

>> How can you lie about him "leading" the limo when he never did this? =A0Ju=
>st why
>> would you presume that a Washington based SS agent would be needed to "lea=


>d" the
>> Presidential limo in a strange city when you had the local police there?
>>

>> > =A0 =A0 In short, every person who should be in the follow up (Queen Mar=


>y
>> >-1956 Cadillac) car for the motorcade can be seen in the video in the
>> >actual followup car in Love Field when the video clip shows what the
>> >narrator calls a standdown.
>>

>> Everyone, that is, except for the two agents pulled off at the last minute=


>.
>>
>> >Every Agent and Aide who is in the
>> >followup car at Love Field in Dallas is in the followup car in Dealey

>> >Plaza =A0during the assassination forty minutes later, and the running


>> >boards are full with two agents on each running board.
>>

>> However, the assigned agents for the rear of the Presidential limo aren't =


>there.
>>
>> They were told to standdown.
>>
>> >So no more
>> >agents can be on the followup car in either Love Field or Dealey
>> >Plaza.
>>
>> This has no bearing on the agents assigned to the rear of JFK's limo.
>>
>> > That right there makes this"standdown" video non-factual.
>>
>> Poor logic.
>>
>> >Why would another agent be assigned to stand on the step if he was not
>> >from the followup car?
>>
>> Because he wasn't assigned to the followup car.
>>
>> >Maybe people who do not know the case will see
>> >this and say wow a standdown. But all you have to do is know the
>> >agents and aides in the followup car and this video is easily
>> >discounted.
>>
>> Only by LNT'ers who are easily misled.
>>
>> Honest people can see it quite clearly.
>>
>> >The agent who is running and stops is not in the process
>> >of jumping on the back of GG-300 (Presidential Limousine)
>> >back step- he seems to be signaling to the followup car shrugging his
>> >shoulder as if to say everything is perfect and very relaxed.
>>

>> That, of course, is an outright lie. =A0Why bother to lie? =A0Is it becaus=


>e you
>> believe that lurkers who ...
>>

>> read more =BB
>

David Von Pein

unread,
Feb 28, 2008, 10:22:26 PM2/28/08
to
>>> "How could you improve security to a president by having a flipping general riding in the front seat of a limo?" <<<

<chuckle time>

Very good point, Marty. I hadn't really thought of that common-sense
angle you brought up (but I probably should have).

CT-Kooks like to point out the fact that no "general" was in the
middle of the front seat (as has been the case in other motorcades).
But it's an argument, as Marty alludes to, that really goes NOWHERE
for the CTers.

And I think, to a large extent, the CT argument of "WHY WASN'T DR.
BURKLEY PLACED CLOSER TO JFK IN THE MOTORCADE?" can be placed in that
same "IT GOES NOWHERE" basket.

Now, yes, I suppose having Burkley right THERE near JFK after he was
wounded might have helped the President survive the attack (depending
on where his wounds were located). But, then too, a bullet right
through the head is still going to result in a dead President, even if
Burkley had been sitting in JFK's lap.

But CTers love chaff like that. They exist on it. Because without junk
like that (which really goes noplace at all, of course), the CT-Kooks
have got nothing. (Certainly no non-Oswald evidence and non-Oz
bullets.)

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Feb 29, 2008, 5:22:35 PM2/29/08
to

www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/33edee20e845c2ff/bc8a829d88ec7b1d?#bc8a829d88ec7b1d


>>> "Some dunce SS agent was in Rybka's spot, so when Rybka went to jump onto the running board there was no room for him and he got left behind. You can see the dunce realizing his error and climbing into the back seat, too late though." <<<


Some interesting information regarding Agent Henry Rybka can be
gleaned from the Original Report of ATSAIC Emory Roberts of the Secret
Service (a report that is dated November 29, 1963):

"11:55 a.m.: The President (right rear seat), Mrs. Kennedy (left
rear seat), Governor John Connally (of Texas) (right jump seat), Mrs.
Connally (left jump seat), ASAIC Roy T. Kellerman front seat, with SA
William Greer driving, (SS car 100 X--top removed) departed Love
Field.

"SA Donald Lawton of 8 a.m.-4 p.m. shift remained at Love Field
with SA Warner and Rybka to set up security for the President's
departure for Bergstrom AFB, Austin, Texas. The Presidential aircraft
was due to depart Dallas at 2:35 p.m.

"The following persons departed Love Field in Secret Service
Follow-up car, 679 X and were located in and on running boards of car
as follows:

"ATSAIC Emory P. Roberts--front seat--operating radio.
SA Samuel Kinney--driving (did an excellent job)
Mr. Kenneth O'Donnell, Appointment Secretary to the President,
left jump seat.
Mr. David Powers, Presidential Aide, right jump seat.
SA Glen Bennett, left rear seat.
SA George Hickey, right rear seat (manning AR-15 (rifle)
SA Clinton Hill, left running board, front.
SA William Mclntyre, left running board, behind Hill.
SA John D. Ready, right running board, front.
SA Paul Landis, right running board behind Ready.

"Note: On shift report for Nov. 22, 1963, I listed SA Rybka as
riding in center of rear seat, which was in error, as he was not in
car. As mentioned above, he remained at Love Field." -- EMORY P.
ROBERTS

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-rober.htm

=======================


I just wonder what the conspiracy theorists think of the above remarks
made by Emory Roberts on 11/29/63? (CTers, that is, who are of the
opinion that something "shady" was going on at Love Field regarding
Agent Rybka...such as some sort of "standdown", as CTers like to call
it.)


Do CTers think that the presence of one extra Secret Service agent
(Rybka) in the Dallas motorcade would have made any kind of
substantial difference at all when it comes to President Kennedy being
shot and killed?

In other words -- WHERE DO CTers GO WITH THIS "RYBKA WAS LEFT AT LOVE
FIELD" TOPIC?

Where CAN they "go" with it? Where?

Does it really make much difference whether or not Rybka was
originally scheduled to sit in the rear seat of the Queen Mary SS car
(between Agents Bennett and Hickey) during the Dallas parade?

Rybka's being assigned to the back seat certainly wouldn't change the
basic fact that: NO AGENTS WERE SPECIFICALLY ASSIGNED TO RUN ALONG THE
PRESIDENT'S CAR DURING THE ENTIRE MOTORCADE DRIVE THROUGH DALLAS ON
11/22/63.

I'll add the following addendum, just for the heck of it. This comes
from a statement made by SS agent Clint Hill, dated November 30, 1963
(and I'm going to assume that these comments probably also apply to
any SS agent who was assigned to the RIGHT-FRONT running board of the
SS follow-up car, which would have been Special Agent John D. Ready on
11/22/63 in Dallas):

"My instructions for Dallas were to work the left rear of the
Presidential automobile and remain in close proximity to Mrs. John F.
Kennedy at all times. The agent assigned to work the left rear of the
Presidential automobile rides on the forward portion of the left hand
running board of the Secret Service follow-up car and only moves
forward to walk alongside the Presidential automobile when it slows to
such a pace that people can readily approach the auto on foot." --
CLINTON J. HILL

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/sa-hill.htm

=======================

In the final analysis, this whole SS argument is a relatively-moot one
anyway, from yet another angle. That angle being:

It's still very likely that Lee Oswald could (and would) have killed
the President, even with extra SS agents being in Dealey Plaza and
even with an agent riding on the back bumper on JFK's side of SS-100-X
at precisely 12:30 PM.

Short of the Secret Service throwing a 360-degree "wall" of agents
around the body of JFK in the Plaza, it's still quite likely that
Oswald would have been able to successfully pull off the assassination
with his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle from a position 60 feet above Elm
Street.


www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

www.blogger.com/profile/12501570830179992520

circuitbr...@yahoo.com

unread,
Feb 29, 2008, 9:16:44 PM2/29/08
to

Mark Giolli writes: Well I do not think the conspiracy theorists are
crazy, I just think they are searching for things which are not
there. They like to make noise and try to bully people on the net by
capitalizing letters. Doesn't seem to work and does not prove the
truth. You still need facts to support your claims. The Secret
Service agent is smiling with the other agents in "Queen Mary". To
make more out of a shrug (or rather 3 shrugs) is ridiculous and
without basis of fact. And telling me are you crazy in capitals does
not make anything you claim about 3 shrugs more credible. Conspiracy
theorists need facts in the case. You had your heyday in the late
1970s and early 80s when the HSCA did a poor job. Yet now computerized
forensics are proving things that were known before but not backed
up.. Now we see that the Warren Commission was generally correct. I
saw the "standdown" video two nights ago. Apart from searching for
things which are not there, conspiracy theorists are discrediting the
reputation of a man like Emory Roberts. Just more of the same for the
last 40 years. Mark Giolli


>
> How is that a "standdown" or conspiracy? �He is signaling to
>
>
>
> > ODonnell who is a good friend of President Kennedy. ODonnell can be
> > seen signaling back in a very relaxed way. Things at that point were
> > good as for scheduling of speeches and events that day. ODonnell and
> > Powers would have been happy the cavalcade was on time to make it to
> > the Trade Mart �at 12:30 PM, and later to Austin that evening for the
> > Democratic fundraiser. �As it turned out the motorcade was only 5
> > minutes behind schedule when it was in Dealey Plaza as Dave Powers had
> > noted many times in interviews. The Trade Mart was five minutes from
> > Dealey Plaza. No one knew shots would be fired in Dealey Plaza prior
> > to 12:30 noontime except Lee Harvey Oswald. But my point about the
> > "standdown" video is that it is easily discounted and fiction based on
> > the occupants of the 1956 Cadillac followup car. The 1956 Cadillac
> > incidentally and obviously followed the 1961 Lincoln Continental
> > Limousine which contained President and Mrs. Kennedy, Governor and

> > Mrs. Connally, Bill Greer and Roy Kellerman. � Sincerly,MarkGiolli


>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------��-----
> > Delicious ideas to please the pickiest eaters. Watch the video on AOL

> > Living- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

circuitbr...@yahoo.com

unread,
Feb 29, 2008, 9:49:41 PM2/29/08
to
On Feb 28, 2:04�pm, Gil Jesus <GJJm...@aol.com> wrote:
> You know so much about this, you don't even know the name of the SS
> agent who stood with his arms out.
>
> It was Henry Rybka.

Mark Giolli writes: In the video the Narrator mentions the name
several times. The Agents who were in the followup car was what I made
my comments about. They were supposed to be there and they were there
from Love Field to Dealey. You can look at my posts since the 1990s
and see I have not swayed from what I have always said. There will
never be any proof of a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy.. Even
that stuff which the Dallas Police brought out a week ago was
nonsense. Yet the CT's want to make more out of something Wade thought
up. Conspiracy theorists write books on the flimsiest of evidence and
then they get mad and frustrated when nothing comes of it. They are
underestimating the intelligence of people.I would write more on these
groups on google, yet debating an issue is only interesting when you
have people who want to weigh evidence in objective manners. When
there is no evidence to debate and the CT's know it, they turn to
yelling and shouting and bullying to prove their point. It does
nothing. It just makes people see the venue of arguing on the net as
circus atmosphere. Something the CT's have made of the Kennedy
assassination for years. Even Dealey Plaza which should be a sacred
place to reflect on President Kennedy and objective history, has been
turned into a circus atmosphere. But the truth prevails always and the
truth is in the facts. The facts of the case are that Kennedy was shot
by Lee Harvey Oswald and only by Lee Harvey Oswald devoid of a
conspiracy.Sincerly, Mark Giolli

>
> And it's OBVIOUS from the video that Roberts is motioning him away
> from the rear bumper.

Mark Giolli writes: What was the Agent (Rybka) supposed to do? Jump on
the back of the bumper and hang on there all the way to the Trade Mart
with the agents in the followup car watching him? What was the point
of having Ready and Landis on the right running boards if
that is the case? Where do you guys come up with this stuff? Mark
Giolli


> Any idiot can see that.

Mark Giolli writes: More of the same. When frustration comes up
insults and bullying surface. I suppose this happens when people
discount such flimsy evidence of the CT's.Like I said I would write
more in google groups if the people who commented in response to my
comments used good manners and objective reasoning. But when it turns
to calling people idiots or saying "ARE YOU CRAZY" in capitals -which
they so often do in response to the LNers comments, what is the point
of wasting time on google groups?The evidence is on the side of the
LNer theorys. It is hard for the CT's to deal with. Obviously. Mark
Giolli


>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QAWiIRgx0g
>
> Here's some more info for you "circuitbrealer":
>
> The President doesn't have the final say on the level of protection he
> is given. That includes where the agents stand and where the
> motorcycles ride.

Mark Giolli writes: He does not have the final say but he did have a
say. He did not like them on the back bumper and they listened to him
when the crowds were not too wild. Mark Giolli


> http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/03/VP/11-VP.html
>
> In Berlin, "Kennedy allowed" agents on the rear bumpers AND
> motorcycles on the side of his limo:

Mark Giolli writes. The people of Berlin were very boisturous for
President Kennedy. It was not just President Kennedy who was in the
limousine in Berlin was it? Konrad Adenaur and Willy Brandt were in
the car also. So it was not just about President Kennedy's protection.
And that was Germany not the United States. The fact they brought the
limousine over does not mean he can dictate German security does it?
Look I put some videos on youtube regarding President Kennedy and his
trip to Texas and all that. Look up CircuitBreaker1582 on youtube and
you can find my videos. Even in Florida a week before Texas, the SS
agents jumped on the back of the limousine. I am not saying he was the
last word in when they jumped on the back bumper of the limousine, or
else Clint Hill wouldn't have occasionally jumped on the left bumper
in Dallas. But the suggestion was listened to. Mark Giolli
> http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1L4q...


>
> AND he "allowed" a General to ride in the front seat
>

> http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1L*4...


>
> In Tampa, "Kennedy allowed" agents to ride on the rear of his limo and
> the General to ride in the front seat:

Mark Giolli writes: Well I just said this.. Just because they rode on
the back sometimes does
not prove a standdown. That is the logic of CT's. Yet when credible
evidence is found they say it is fraud. The CT's discount the autopsy
photos. How ridiculous is that? Mark Giolli
>


>


circuitbr...@yahoo.com

unread,
Feb 29, 2008, 9:54:03 PM2/29/08
to
On Feb 28, 2:30�pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/thread/2e007979...

>
> >>> "What an outrageous misrepresentation of the Secret Sevice man's body language. .... His body language isn't merely a dismissive "shrug"; it clearly is an incredulous and urgent questioning of Emory Roberts' order. His body language clearly reads "What the Hell's going on???" " <<<
>
> A person who has studied this matter in pretty good depth--Gary Mack
> (at least I'm fairly sure it was Gary who said this; if it wasn't
> Gary, I apologize to him)--has stated that it's his belief that Agent
> Henry Rybka (the shoulder-shrugging Secret Service agent who was left
> at Love Field) was merely kidding around in a playful manner with the
> other SS agents in the Queen Mary follow-up car.

Mark Giolli writes: And Gary Mack is a man I respect. Whether I agree
with everything he says is not relevant. Fact is the man takes
evidence and discounts it if it seems logical to him based on facts.
Gary Mack has been a great addition to the assassination study. I
respect him very much. Mark Giolli.
>

>
> And on a big-screen TV, it does look as though Agent Rybka has a bit
> of a smile on his face as he's "shrugging" and looking toward the
> other agents in the Queen Mary vehicle.

> Mark Giolli writes: That is what I have seen for years. The first time I saw the agent smiling and footage of that video was in 1979. I was watching a movie called the Wanderers when I was 14 in the summer of 1979. And they showed that clip during the movie. And the Agent Rybka is seen on the movie. Mark Giolli
>

Ben Holmes

unread,
Mar 1, 2008, 12:56:40 AM3/1/08
to
In article <edf9e0b3-538d-49c7...@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
circuitbr...@yahoo.com says...

>
>On Feb 28, 2:04=EF=BF=BDpm, Gil Jesus <GJJm...@aol.com> wrote:
>> You know so much about this, you don't even know the name of the SS
>> agent who stood with his arms out.
>>
>> It was Henry Rybka.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: In the video the Narrator mentions the name
>several times. The Agents who were in the followup car was what I made
>my comments about. They were supposed to be there and they were there
>from Love Field to Dealey.

The agents in the followup car had *NOTHING* to do with the duties of other
agents.

Sorta like saying that the rest of the press shouldn't have been allowed in
Dealey Plaza, because Altgens was already there.

It's a silly meaningless bit of logic, and Mark can't defend it. Indeed, he'll
refuse to respond to this.


>You can look at my posts since the 1990s
>and see I have not swayed from what I have always said. There will
>never be any proof of a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy..


That would, of course, depend on what *YOU* would label as "proof".


The fact that LNT'ers can't explain the evidence in *NON* conspiratorial terms
is damning.


The fact that LNT'ers rarely even try demonstrates their cowardice.


>Even that stuff which the Dallas Police brought out a week ago was
>nonsense. Yet the CT's want to make more out of something Wade thought
>up. Conspiracy theorists write books on the flimsiest of evidence and
>then they get mad and frustrated when nothing comes of it.

LOL!!!

LNT'ers run from the evidence cited and quoted in this forum every day.


>They are underestimating the intelligence of people.


That's a silly statement. Considering that as many as 90% of America *agrees*
that there was a conspiracy, to "underestimate" their intelligence is to fault
our own.

It is, in fact, a frequent conception on the part of elitest LNT'ers that
America is too ignorant and stupid to understand the facts in this case.

I'm perfectly satisfied with the intelligence of the average lurker.


>I would write more on these
>groups on google, yet debating an issue is only interesting when you
>have people who want to weigh evidence in objective manners.


Nah... you're just a coward like all the rest of them. The evidence simply
isn't in your favor, so you pull out any excuse you can to run from that
evidence.


>When there is no evidence to debate and the CT's know it, they turn to
>yelling and shouting and bullying to prove their point.

I have "45 Questions" that demonstrate otherwise.

And the intelligence of the average lurker isn't going to miss the fact that
your entire argument isn't based on any evidence, and indeed, simply doesn't
even make sense.

When you're ready to start trading citations - I have a dozen or so quotes from
people that dispute your thesis about JFK and any idea that he didn't want
people on the rear of the limo.

But I know that you can't support your faith... nor will you even try.

Any interested lurkers, I'll be happy to point you in the direction of solid
evidence demonstrating Mark's lack of truthfulness about JFK's "requests."


>It does nothing.

Demonstrating the dishonesty and cowardice of LNT'ers is never a meaningless
task, it helps lurkers to judge the evidence.


>It just makes people see the venue of arguing on the net as
>circus atmosphere. Something the CT's have made of the Kennedy
>assassination for years. Even Dealey Plaza which should be a sacred
>place to reflect on President Kennedy and objective history, has been
>turned into a circus atmosphere.


I've always commented that the LNT'er faction treats the WCR as their bible, and
they try to uphold their *faith* rather than the evidence.


>But the truth prevails always and the
>truth is in the facts.


Yep. This is why people like you will always be running away from people such
as I, who *do* know the evidence, and can cite it at the drop of a hat.

>The facts of the case are that Kennedy was shot
>by Lee Harvey Oswald and only by Lee Harvey Oswald devoid of a
>conspiracy.

Sadly, you can't produce evidence that proves this. Indeed, there's much to
dispute - and you can't defend.


>Sincerly,

If you *were* "sincer" - you'd be able to defend your own words with citations
and quotes.

You can't, and you aren't.


>Mark Giolli
>
>>
>> And it's OBVIOUS from the video that Roberts is motioning him away
>> from the rear bumper.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: What was the Agent (Rybka) supposed to do?

His job.

>Jump on
>the back of the bumper and hang on there all the way to the Trade Mart
>with the agents in the followup car watching him?

Yep. That is EXACTLY what they were supposed to be doing.

Or would you like to defend your apparent presumption that Rybka and Lawton came
all the way from Washington to guard the airport?


>What was the point
>of having Ready and Landis on the right running boards if
>that is the case?


What was the point of having more than one press car?

Do you really presume that such idiocy isn't seen through by lurkers?


>Where do you guys come up with this stuff?

The Secret Service. Palamara has questioned quite a few agents about this
particular action of Emory Roberts.

Tell us, just what "evidence" do you have of Lawton & Rybka's duties that day?

And how do you "lead" a limo by running behind it?

>Mark
>Giolli
>> Any idiot can see that.
>Mark Giolli writes: More of the same. When frustration comes up
>insults and bullying surface. I suppose this happens when people
>discount such flimsy evidence of the CT's.Like I said I would write
>more in google groups if the people who commented in response to my
>comments used good manners and objective reasoning.

You're a liar and a coward. Any excuse will do to avoid answering me or others
who present the evidence.

I've seen LNT'ers pull this same excuse against CT'ers who were nothing but
perfect gentlemen.

Me, I'm going to call a spade a spade. You, Mark; are a cowardly liar.


>But when it turns
>to calling people idiots or saying "ARE YOU CRAZY" in capitals -which
>they so often do in response to the LNers comments, what is the point
>of wasting time on google groups?


The fact is, of course, that you *can't* respond to the evidence... so you have
to invent these excuses to avoid defending the garbage you type.


>The evidence is on the side of the
>LNer theorys.


Then you'd have no problem presenting it. Sadly, that rarely happens, and never
successfully.


>It is hard for the CT's to deal with.


I've demolished your silliness here. You've been silent.


>Obviously. Mark
>Giolli
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D1QAWiIRgx0g


>>
>> Here's some more info for you "circuitbrealer":
>>
>> The President doesn't have the final say on the level of protection he
>> is given. That includes where the agents stand and where the
>> motorcycles ride.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: He does not have the final say but he did have a
>say. He did not like them on the back bumper


You make assertions that you can't support.

Care to provide *ANY* evidence for this lie?

>and they listened to him
>when the crowds were not too wild.


Simply not true. The agents rode the back based on *THEIR* perception of needed
security - the President's wishes had nothing to do with it. *NOR* was there
any 'Presidential wish' in this matter.

Far too many SS agents have stated otherwise.


>Mark Giolli
>> http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/03/VP/11-VP.html
>>
>> In Berlin, "Kennedy allowed" agents on the rear bumpers AND
>> motorcycles on the side of his limo:
>Mark Giolli writes. The people of Berlin were very boisturous for
>President Kennedy. It was not just President Kennedy who was in the
>limousine in Berlin was it? Konrad Adenaur and Willy Brandt were in
>the car also. So it was not just about President Kennedy's protection.

The American Secret Service isn't protecting others. How silly!


>And that was Germany not the United States. The fact they brought the
>limousine over does not mean he can dictate German security does it?
>Look I put some videos on youtube regarding President Kennedy and his
>trip to Texas and all that. Look up CircuitBreaker1582 on youtube and
>you can find my videos. Even in Florida a week before Texas, the SS
>agents jumped on the back of the limousine.

Yep... it was a common occurrence, it was done when the SS agents felt the need
to do it.


>I am not saying he was the
>last word in when they jumped on the back bumper of the limousine,

He wasn't any "word" at all. You can't cite *ANYTHING* other than your opinion
that JFK was involved in keeping agents off. Indeed, I can cite numerous SS
agents who SPECIFICALLY state otherwise.

When you have to lie to make a point, the only point you've made is that you're
a liar.

>or else Clint Hill wouldn't have occasionally jumped on the left bumper
>in Dallas. But the suggestion was listened to.

There was *NO* "suggestion".


>> Mark Giolli
>> http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1L4q...
>>
>> AND he "allowed" a General to ride in the front seat
>>
>> http://pictures.aol.com/galleries/gjjmail/41602cXrkH0*ic1Lb0imwIK1L*4...
>>
>> In Tampa, "Kennedy allowed" agents to ride on the rear of his limo and
>> the General to ride in the front seat:
>Mark Giolli writes: Well I just said this.. Just because they rode on
>the back sometimes does
>not prove a standdown.

The proof of a "standdown" is the fact that Lawton and Rybka were prevented, at
literally the last moment, from doing their job.


>That is the logic of CT's.

No, that's the *EVIDENCE* speaking.


>Yet when credible
>evidence is found they say it is fraud. The CT's discount the autopsy
>photos. How ridiculous is that? Mark Giolli

Not ridiculous at all - over 40 some medical eyewitnesses "discount" the autopsy
photos, why shouldn't we agree with them?

Indeed, the American legal system well understands the ease with which photos
can be manipulated and altered, and will not admit them without eyewitness
testimony.

aeffects

unread,
Mar 1, 2008, 4:42:28 AM3/1/08
to
Top Post....

whoa.... game-set-match, no contest to boot. That is what one can call
a "Lone Nut dismantling" Rest assure, lurkers are lurking :)

On Feb 29, 9:56 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
> In article <edf9e0b3-538d-49c7-9263-0d4211830...@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> circuitbreaker1...@yahoo.com says...

circuitbr...@yahoo.com

unread,
Mar 1, 2008, 10:51:46 PM3/1/08
to
On Feb 29, 9:56�pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
> In article <edf9e0b3-538d-49c7-9263-0d4211830...@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> circuitbreaker1...@yahoo.com says...

>
>
>
> >On Feb 28, 2:04=EF=BF=BDpm, Gil Jesus <GJJm...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> You know so much about this, you don't even know the name of the SS
> >> agent who stood with his arms out.
>
> >> It was Henry Rybka.
>
> >MarkGiolliwrites: In the video the Narrator mentions the name

> >several times. The Agents who were in the followup car was what I made
> >my comments about. They were supposed to be there and they were there
> >from Love Field to Dealey.
>
> The agents in the followup car had *NOTHING* to do with the duties of other
> agents.

Mark Giolli writes: So an agent would be completely separate from the
agents in the Queen Mary? That sort of goes against your claim (or the
videos claim) that Emory Roberts told the Agent Rybka to standdown.
This standdown topic is such a waste of time. Everytime anything comes
up with CT's it never amounts to anything. And they whine and whine
about it. They like to poke holes in the LN theory but they do not put
it all together in thier own claim. Who are the shooters and who
backed it up. Do not tell us supposed possibilities. How did this
supposed standdown result in a conspiracy? To use the CTs manner FILL
IN THE HOLES OF THE CASE!!!! Capitalizing really doesn't prove much.
They never do. They claim there is a standdown and that is all they
have. No ballistics to back it up. No Autopsy results to back it up.
Nothing. And their frustration comes out as bullying on the board
when they figure what they are saying is nonsense and lies. Mark
Giolli


>
> Sorta like saying that the rest of the press shouldn't have been allowed in
> Dealey Plaza, because Altgens was already there.
>

> It's a silly meaningless bit of logic, andMarkcan't defend it. �Indeed, he'll


> refuse to respond to this.

Mark Giolli writes: Refuse to respond to what? You have not said
anything which amounts to anything concrete.. All you do is bend the
truth of the WCR and then CTS say now explain it. Yet the CTs are
trying to have the LNers explain how they bent of the truth. Instead
of the real truth. Mark Giolli.


>
> >You can look at my posts since the 1990s
> >and see I have not swayed from what I have always said. There will
> >never be any proof of a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy..
>
> That would, of course, depend on what *YOU* would label as "proof".

Mark Giolli writes: The lonenut theory is the truth. As time goes by
all independent objective study on the wound ballistics (as they are
reported and not changed by CTs theory) and forensic results come to
the conclusion that President Kennedy was shot by Lee Harvey Oswald to
the exclusion of anyone else. There will never be proof of a
conspiracy. You can look up my posts for the last 10 years and I have
said this before. Going over the CTs evidence which is bent and not
accurate does not come out with the truth. Come out with real
ballistics and you get the truth. Mark Giolli


>
> The fact that LNT'ers can't explain the evidence in *NON* conspiratorial terms
> is damning.

Mark Giolli writes: There does not have to be a conspiracy. Kennedy
had motorcades all over the world and he was in the open convertible.
My Mother saw President Kennedy in 1962 in Berkeley from a distance of
5-10 feet in the same limousine he was killed in. There was no thought
at that time that anyone would kill the President. The fact that it
happened does not mean it has to be a conspiracy. You people back up
the claim of William Manchester-which Peter Jennings mentioned to
summed up his conclusions of this program in 2003.


>
> The fact that LNT'ers rarely even try demonstrates their cowardice.

Mark Giolli writes: Funny thing is I read about boxing and have met
boxers and fighters from all over the world.. And in message boards I
never had any former boxer mention cowardice of another person, yet
the CTs mention it all the time. Mark Giolli


>
> >Even that stuff which the Dallas Police brought out a week ago was
> >nonsense. Yet the CT's want to make more out of something Wade thought
> >up. �Conspiracy theorists write books on the flimsiest of evidence and
> >then they get mad and frustrated when nothing comes of it.
>
> LOL!!!
>
> LNT'ers run from the evidence cited and quoted in this forum every day.

Mark Giolli writes: The evidence you mention is bent and twisted. It
is not the actual physical evidence which was collected in 1963. And
the witness testimony you mention is from the 1980s up to now, not
1963 and the years after that. This stuff is what Thomas Buchanan
inadvertently started. But the thing the CT's have done is to make the
case strong for LNers. Everytime a claim comes out by the CTs it is
easily discounted and it just goes under the long list of theories the
CTs have tried to say happened. Mark Giolli

> That's a silly statement. �Considering that as many as 90% of America *agrees*
> that there was a conspiracy, to "underestimate" their intelligence is to fault
> our own.

Mark Giolli writes: The american people believe what they are told.
They do not know the facts or the ballistics. You sure give the
american people credit for reading the Warren Report or Rush to
Judgement so they can come to their own judgement. All they saw is the
movie JFK and how Oliver Stone lied to make a good movie. Mark Giolli


> It is, in fact, a frequent conception on the part of elitest LNT'ers that
> America is too ignorant and stupid to understand the facts in this case.

Mark Giolli writes: I do not think the general population is
interested enough to read about it. I started reading about President
Kennedy and his family which lead me to read about his shooting also -
as well as Robert Kennedy's shooting. I even got into the pantry of
the Ambassador Hotel to see where Bobby Kennedy was shot. But the
general public is not interested in this as I am or you or others
are. If people knew the case objectively it is an easy case. It is
easy to spend 3 hours watching a movie in 1991-1992. Just because I
believe it was Oswald alone does not diminish President Kennedy. I
went to Dallas 6 times from California to look around and take
pictures and study the Plaza. Mark Giolli


>
> I'm perfectly satisfied with the intelligence of the average lurker.

Mark Giolli writes: so you think the CTs have higher intelligence than
the LNers? I am sure your answer will be yes. Mark Giolli


>
> >I would write more on these
> >groups on google, yet debating an issue is only interesting when you
> >have people who want to weigh evidence in objective manners.
>
> Nah... you're just a coward like all the rest of them. �The evidence simply
> isn't in your favor, so you pull out any excuse you can to run from that
> evidence.

Mark Giolli writes: As a matter of fact. I think the cowardice is in
the people who follow the exciting claims just for attention. I do not
get into the case for attention or to come up with wild theories. I
look at things in a very objective logical way and base my belief on
that. When I was a kid I thought there was a conpiracy. Then when I
was 20 or so after looking at all the pictures and reading many of the
books and witness testimony at the time it is clear there was no
conpiracy. When I see the pictures for 31 years of Dealey Plaza and
the Z film and the conclusions of Boswell Finck and Humes, I have to
use my judgement. The autopsy photos prove beyond a reasonable doubt a
rear entry. Explain that? As a matter of fact I suggest you read David
Belin's book. There is no way a conspiracy occured. Not in Dealey
Plaza at least. The CTs do not take into consideration Oswald's
attempt at Walker. But that is old boring news. The exciting news to
you guys is the late Emory Roberts telling some agent to standdown
when all the agent was doing was shrugging as a joke to the other
agents who were his friends in the followup car. Mark Giolli.. >


> >When there is no evidence to debate and the CT's know it, they turn to
> >yelling and shouting and bullying to prove their point.
>
> I have "45 Questions" that demonstrate otherwise.
>
> And the intelligence of the average lurker isn't going to miss the fact that
> your entire argument isn't based on any evidence, and indeed, simply doesn't
> even make sense.

Mark Giolli writes: I know the evidence. If I just tell you now you
will just discount it. It is not a good debate and it proves nothing
since the CTs bend the truth and put lies in there which they have
developed and formulated with other CTs, which then (they think) is
ironclad. Yet it is so far from the original ballistics and forensic
results that is it another case. (The fantasy case.) I have commented
on this forum before. Just put in my name and you will see my
opinions. I just came on there this time to say how ridiculous that
standdown video was. And if such a conspiracy happened, it was there
to be seen on the movie called the Wanderers (1979). By the way, if
you want to see some of my videos on youtube you can by putting in the
search Circuitbreaker1582. I just put clips in which are very
common. Many from movies I saw over the years. Alot of clips from
Dealey Plaza. Mark Giolli


>
> When you're ready to start trading citations - I have a dozen or so quotes from
> people that dispute your thesis about JFK and any idea that he didn't want
> people on the rear of the limo.

Mark Giolli writes: my guess is your citations are not near the year
1963.. Mark Giolli


>
> But I know that you can't support your faith... nor will you even try.

Mark Giolli writes: What is the point. The evidence is on the side of
a lone gunman and even you know this I am sure. Mark Giolli


>
> Any interested lurkers, I'll be happy to point you in the direction of solid

> evidence demonstratingMark'slack of truthfulness about JFK's "requests."


>
> >It does nothing.
>
> Demonstrating the dishonesty and cowardice of LNT'ers is never a meaningless
> task, it helps lurkers to judge the evidence.

Mark Giolli writes: If they want to judge the evidence they should
read the Warren Report. Then the Jim Moore book and then the Posner
book which is just supporting the Warren Report with a little
modification. Then they can read Rush to Judgement and the Marr's book
and even Pictures of the Pain. If you read the books and get the
feeling of the times and the witnesses comments in 1963 eventually it
becomes clear. Reading what the CTs say on google groups is not
really going to prove anything. Mark Giolli


>
> >It just makes people see the venue of arguing on the net as
> >circus atmosphere. Something the CT's have made of the Kennedy
> >assassination for years. Even Dealey Plaza which should be a sacred
> >place to reflect on President Kennedy and objective history, has been
> >turned into a circus atmosphere.
>
> I've always commented that the LNT'er faction treats the WCR as their bible, and
> they try to uphold their *faith* rather than the evidence.

Mark Giolli writes: No I do not hold the WCR as a bible. It was done
in haste and sped up for the benefit of LBJ. But that does not prove a
conspiracy. That was politics. Mark Giolli


>
> >But the truth prevails always and the
> >truth is in the facts.
>
> Yep. �This is why people like you will always be running away from people such
> as I, who *do* know the evidence, and can cite it at the drop of a hat.

Mark Giolli writes: The evidence you cite are lies which were created
by CTs to build more lies on top of that, so that the truth cannot be
deciphered anymore. I can say the pictures prove rear entry and the
beveling on the inside of the skull is proof, and you will say there
is doctoring of the pictures and coverup. So even if there is proof
CTs just bend it so it is discounted. Like David Lifton who wrote two
books about nonsense. What can be proved with those kind of tactics?.
I suggest to people who want to know the case to read the books and
not read the nonsense on this board. Mark Giolli
>
>

Ben Holmes

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 12:35:47 AM3/2/08
to
In article <69c41b3e-ad20-4929...@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
circuitbr...@yahoo.com says...
>
>On Feb 29, 9:56=EF=BF=BDpm, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
>> In article <edf9e0b3-538d-49c7-9263-0d4211830...@d4g2000prg.googlegroups.c=

>om>,
>> circuitbreaker1...@yahoo.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Feb 28, 2:04=3DEF=3DBF=3DBDpm, Gil Jesus <GJJm...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >> You know so much about this, you don't even know the name of the SS
>> >> agent who stood with his arms out.
>>
>> >> It was Henry Rybka.
>>
>> >MarkGiolliwrites: In the video the Narrator mentions the name
>> >several times. The Agents who were in the followup car was what I made
>> >my comments about. They were supposed to be there and they were there
>> >from Love Field to Dealey.
>>
>> The agents in the followup car had *NOTHING* to do with the duties of
>> other agents.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: So an agent would be completely separate from the
>agents in the Queen Mary?

Non sequitur... you tried to claim that the agents in the *FOLLOWUP* car
precluded other agents.


>That sort of goes against your claim (or the
>videos claim) that Emory Roberts told the Agent Rybka to standdown.


What did Lawton and Rybka travel from Washington to do?

What was their "duty" at the Airport?

And when do you plan to explain how Rybka was "leading" the limo from behind?


>This standdown topic is such a waste of time.

The evidence is *always* a "waste of time" for LNT'ers...


>Everytime anything comes
>up with CT's it never amounts to anything. And they whine and whine
>about it. They like to poke holes in the LN theory but they do not put
>it all together in thier own claim.


"There were multiple shooters."

Done. Now you won't need to lie again.


>Who are the shooters and who
>backed it up. Do not tell us supposed possibilities. How did this
>supposed standdown result in a conspiracy? To use the CTs manner FILL
>IN THE HOLES OF THE CASE!!!! Capitalizing really doesn't prove much.
>They never do. They claim there is a standdown and that is all they
>have. No ballistics to back it up. No Autopsy results to back it up.
>Nothing. And their frustration comes out as bullying on the board
>when they figure what they are saying is nonsense and lies. Mark
>Giolli


Embarrassed, aren't you?

You see, people simply aren't as stupid as you must feel that they are.

>> Sorta like saying that the rest of the press shouldn't have been allowed
>> in Dealey Plaza, because Altgens was already there.
>>
>> It's a silly meaningless bit of logic, andMarkcan't defend it. Indeed, he'll
>> refuse to respond to this.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: Refuse to respond to what? You have not said
>anything which amounts to anything concrete.. All you do is bend the
>truth of the WCR and then CTS say now explain it. Yet the CTs are
>trying to have the LNers explain how they bent of the truth. Instead
>of the real truth. Mark Giolli.


Yep... I predicted that you'd refuse to defend it.

>> >You can look at my posts since the 1990s
>> >and see I have not swayed from what I have always said. There will
>> >never be any proof of a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy..
>>
>> That would, of course, depend on what *YOU* would label as "proof".
>
>Mark Giolli writes: The lonenut theory is the truth. As time goes by
>all independent objective study on the wound ballistics (as they are
>reported and not changed by CTs theory)

Three of the four ballistics experts refused to come on board with the SBT.

That's merely a fact.

Embarrassing, isn't it?


>and forensic results come to
>the conclusion that President Kennedy was shot by Lee Harvey Oswald to
>the exclusion of anyone else. There will never be proof of a
>conspiracy. You can look up my posts for the last 10 years and I have
>said this before.

You're a liar and a coward. And you can look up my posts for the last 10 years


and I have said this before.


>Going over the CTs evidence which is bent and not
>accurate does not come out with the truth.

If this were true, then you'd have no problems with the 45 questions, or the 16
smoking guns.


>Come out with real
>ballistics and you get the truth. Mark Giolli


Yep... I agree. Your *one* ballistics expert has been outvoted.

>> The fact that LNT'ers can't explain the evidence in *NON* conspiratorial
>> terms is damning.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: There does not have to be a conspiracy. Kennedy
>had motorcades all over the world and he was in the open convertible.
>My Mother saw President Kennedy in 1962 in Berkeley from a distance of
>5-10 feet in the same limousine he was killed in. There was no thought
>at that time that anyone would kill the President. The fact that it
>happened does not mean it has to be a conspiracy. You people back up
>the claim of William Manchester-which Peter Jennings mentioned to
>summed up his conclusions of this program in 2003.


The fact that LNT'ers can't explain the evidence in *NON* conspiratorial terms
is damning.

>> The fact that LNT'ers rarely even try demonstrates their cowardice.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: Funny thing is I read about boxing and have met
>boxers and fighters from all over the world.. And in message boards I
>never had any former boxer mention cowardice of another person, yet
>the CTs mention it all the time. Mark Giolli


Anytime you'd like, you can show up at the Encino Judo Club, and I'll be happy
to dispense with any rules at all. Just step on the mat, and ask any of the
black belts to point me out.

Cowardice is merely a descriptive term that is defined by actions. When LNT'ers
demonstrate these actions, it's entirely appropriate to *name* that action.


>> >Even that stuff which the Dallas Police brought out a week ago was
>> >nonsense. Yet the CT's want to make more out of something Wade thought
>> >up. Conspiracy theorists write books on the flimsiest of evidence and
>> >then they get mad and frustrated when nothing comes of it.
>>
>> LOL!!!
>>
>> LNT'ers run from the evidence cited and quoted in this forum every day.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: The evidence you mention is bent and twisted. It
>is not the actual physical evidence which was collected in 1963. And
>the witness testimony you mention is from the 1980s up to now, not
>1963 and the years after that.

No, Mark... I have virtually zero interest in statements after 1964. You can't
even *name* an eyewitness who's statements you accept completely. And I'm
*ONLY* referring to 1963-64 statements.


>This stuff is what Thomas Buchanan
>inadvertently started. But the thing the CT's have done is to make the
>case strong for LNers. Everytime a claim comes out by the CTs it is
>easily discounted

Then it would be a simple thing to prove.

You can do so *easily* by simply answering the "45 Questions".

But you won't.


>and it just goes under the long list of theories the
>CTs have tried to say happened. Mark Giolli
>
>
>
>> That's a silly statement. Considering that as many as 90% of America
>> *agrees* that there was a conspiracy, to "underestimate" their
>> intelligence is to fault our own.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: The american people believe what they are told.


In that case, they'd believe the WCR... since this is what the mass media and
the educational system have been teaching them.


>They do not know the facts or the ballistics. You sure give the
>american people credit for reading the Warren Report or Rush to
>Judgement so they can come to their own judgement. All they saw is the
>movie JFK and how Oliver Stone lied to make a good movie. Mark Giolli


Sorry troll, the American people didn't need to wait for Oliver Stone - there
has *NEVER* been a poll that put the belief in non-conspiracy in the majority.


>> It is, in fact, a frequent conception on the part of elitest LNT'ers that
>> America is too ignorant and stupid to understand the facts in this case.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: I do not think the general population is
>interested enough to read about it.


Then publishers should stop publishing such books, would you think?

>I started reading about President
>Kennedy and his family which lead me to read about his shooting also -
>as well as Robert Kennedy's shooting. I even got into the pantry of
>the Ambassador Hotel to see where Bobby Kennedy was shot. But the
>general public is not interested in this as I am or you or others
>are. If people knew the case objectively it is an easy case.

*I* know the case objectively... why not try me, Mark?


>It is
>easy to spend 3 hours watching a movie in 1991-1992. Just because I
>believe it was Oswald alone does not diminish President Kennedy. I
>went to Dallas 6 times from California to look around and take
>pictures and study the Plaza. Mark Giolli
>>
>> I'm perfectly satisfied with the intelligence of the average lurker.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: so you think the CTs have higher intelligence than
>the LNers? I am sure your answer will be yes. Mark Giolli


Up to 90% of Americans smarter than the 10%... yep.


>> >I would write more on these
>> >groups on google, yet debating an issue is only interesting when you
>> >have people who want to weigh evidence in objective manners.
>>
>> Nah... you're just a coward like all the rest of them. The evidence simply
>> isn't in your favor, so you pull out any excuse you can to run from that
>> evidence.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: As a matter of fact. I think the cowardice is in
>the people who follow the exciting claims just for attention. I do not
>get into the case for attention or to come up with wild theories. I
>look at things in a very objective logical way and base my belief on
>that. When I was a kid I thought there was a conpiracy. Then when I
>was 20 or so after looking at all the pictures and reading many of the
>books and witness testimony at the time it is clear there was no
>conpiracy. When I see the pictures for 31 years of Dealey Plaza and
>the Z film and the conclusions of Boswell Finck and Humes, I have to
>use my judgement. The autopsy photos prove beyond a reasonable doubt a
>rear entry. Explain that?

How can I? They don't.


>As a matter of fact I suggest you read David
>Belin's book. There is no way a conspiracy occured.

Then you'd have no problems with answering the "45 Questions."

But you won't. Too much the coward...

>Not in Dealey
>Plaza at least. The CTs do not take into consideration Oswald's
>attempt at Walker. But that is old boring news. The exciting news to
>you guys is the late Emory Roberts telling some agent to standdown
>when all the agent was doing was shrugging as a joke to the other
>agents who were his friends in the followup car. Mark Giolli..


You really *do* think lurkers are stupid, don't you?!


>> >When there is no evidence to debate and the CT's know it, they turn to
>> >yelling and shouting and bullying to prove their point.
>>
>> I have "45 Questions" that demonstrate otherwise.
>>
>> And the intelligence of the average lurker isn't going to miss the
>> fact that your entire argument isn't based on any evidence, and indeed,
>> simply doesn't even make sense.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: I know the evidence. If I just tell you now you
>will just discount it.

If you can't support your assertions with evidence, don't be surprised when
people laugh at you.

>It is not a good debate and it proves nothing


On the contrary, it proves your character...


>since the CTs bend the truth and put lies in there which they have
>developed and formulated with other CTs, which then (they think) is
>ironclad. Yet it is so far from the original ballistics and forensic
>results that is it another case. (The fantasy case.) I have commented
>on this forum before. Just put in my name and you will see my
>opinions. I just came on there this time to say how ridiculous that
>standdown video was. And if such a conspiracy happened, it was there
>to be seen on the movie called the Wanderers (1979). By the way, if
>you want to see some of my videos on youtube you can by putting in the
>search Circuitbreaker1582. I just put clips in which are very
>common. Many from movies I saw over the years. Alot of clips from
>Dealey Plaza. Mark Giolli


How many of them are from the eyewitnesses to the events that day?

Any?


>> When you're ready to start trading citations - I have a dozen or so
>> quotes from people that dispute your thesis about JFK and any idea
>> that he didn't want people on the rear of the limo.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: my guess is your citations are not near the year
>1963.. Mark Giolli


Gutless coward, it would seem.

>> But I know that you can't support your faith... nor will you even try.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: What is the point.


There's *ALWAYS* a point to supporting your own words.

Liars and cowards never seem to understand that.


>The evidence is on the side of
>a lone gunman and even you know this I am sure. Mark Giolli

ROTFLMAO!!! You're too gutless to defend such an assertion!

But don't worry, better men than you have tried and failed to answer the 45
Questions.


>> Any interested lurkers, I'll be happy to point you in the direction of sol=


>id
>> evidence demonstratingMark'slack of truthfulness about JFK's "requests."
>>
>> >It does nothing.
>>

>> Demonstrating the dishonesty and cowardice of LNT'ers is never a meaningle=


>ss
>> task, it helps lurkers to judge the evidence.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: If they want to judge the evidence they should
>read the Warren Report. Then the Jim Moore book and then the Posner
>book which is just supporting the Warren Report with a little
>modification. Then they can read Rush to Judgement and the Marr's book
>and even Pictures of the Pain. If you read the books and get the
>feeling of the times and the witnesses comments in 1963 eventually it
>becomes clear. Reading what the CTs say on google groups is not
>really going to prove anything. Mark Giolli


Of course, you missed the only essential reading... the 26 volumes.

>> >It just makes people see the venue of arguing on the net as
>> >circus atmosphere. Something the CT's have made of the Kennedy
>> >assassination for years. Even Dealey Plaza which should be a sacred
>> >place to reflect on President Kennedy and objective history, has been
>> >turned into a circus atmosphere.
>>

>> I've always commented that the LNT'er faction treats the WCR as their bibl=


>e, and
>> they try to uphold their *faith* rather than the evidence.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: No I do not hold the WCR as a bible. It was done
>in haste and sped up for the benefit of LBJ. But that does not prove a
>conspiracy. That was politics. Mark Giolli


What's the definition of 'Faith' Mark? And then explain to us how *YOUR* belief
doesn't fit the definition.

>> >But the truth prevails always and the
>> >truth is in the facts.
>>
>> Yep. This is why people like you will always be running away from people such
>> as I, who *do* know the evidence, and can cite it at the drop of a hat.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: The evidence you cite are lies


And yet, you can't prove it. In fact, you'll run in the other direction, and
*refuse* to even try to prove it.


>which were created
>by CTs to build more lies on top of that, so that the truth cannot be
>deciphered anymore. I can say the pictures prove rear entry and the
>beveling on the inside of the skull is proof, and you will say there
>is doctoring of the pictures and coverup.


At least one photo is *PROVABLY* doctored.

The BOH photo doesn't match the autopsy report.


>So even if there is proof
>CTs just bend it so it is discounted. Like David Lifton who wrote two
>books about nonsense. What can be proved with those kind of tactics?.
>I suggest to people who want to know the case to read the books and
>not read the nonsense on this board. Mark Giolli

I suggest that you're a coward and a liar. But by all means, PROVE ME WRONG!
I'll be happy to offer you a heartfelt apology. All you have to do is answer
the "45 Questions"

Ben Holmes

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 12:36:51 AM3/2/08
to

I wonder why Mark has been unable to answer this?


In article <fq6js...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 1:40:08 AM3/2/08
to

>>> "What did Lawton and Rybka travel from Washington to do? What was their "duty" at the Airport?" <<<


Emory Roberts explains their duties in his report of 11/29/63:

"SA Donald Lawton of 8 a.m.-4 p.m. shift remained at Love Field
with SA Warner and Rybka to set up security for the President's
departure for Bergstrom AFB, Austin, Texas. The Presidential aircraft
was due to depart Dallas at 2:35 p.m.

The following persons departed Love Field in Secret Service Follow-up
car, 679 X and were located in and on running boards of car as
follows:

ATSAIC Emory P. Roberts--front seat--operating radio.
SA Samuel Kinney--driving (did an excellent job)
Mr. Kenneth O'Donnell, Appointment Secretary to the President, left
jump seat.
Mr. David Powers, Presidential Aide, right jump seat.
SA Glen Bennett, left rear seat.
SA George Hickey, right rear seat (manning AR-15 (rifle)
SA Clinton Hill, left running board, front.
SA William Mclntyre, left running board, behind Hill.
SA John D. Ready, right running board, front.
SA Paul Landis, right running board behind Ready.

Note: On shift report for Nov. 22, 1963, I listed SA Rybka as riding
in center of rear seat, which was in error, as he was not in car. As

mentioned above, he remained at Love Field." -- E. Roberts; 11/29/63


http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-rober.htm

circuitbr...@yahoo.com

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 1:46:45 AM3/2/08
to
On Mar 1, 10:40�pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "What did Lawton and Rybka travel from Washington to do? What was their "duty" at the Airport?" <<<
>
> Emory Roberts explains their duties in his report of 11/29/63:
>
> � � � "SA Donald Lawton of 8 a.m.-4 p.m. shift remained at Love Field
> with SA Warner and Rybka to set up security for the President's
> departure for Bergstrom AFB, Austin, Texas. The Presidential aircraft
> was due to depart Dallas at 2:35 p.m.
Mark Giolli writes: Interesting fact considering that is just 12
minutes short of the time Air Force one left Love Field after the
assassination. Mark Giolli

circuitbr...@yahoo.com

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 2:23:15 AM3/2/08
to
On Mar 1, 9:36�pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
> I wonder whyMarkhas been unable to answer this?
>
> In article <fq6js702...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <df8378fb-42da-455e-9d77-b3f16bf49...@62g2000hsn.googlegroups.com>,
> >circuitbreaker1...@yahoo.com says...

>
> >>I saw a video on the internet about a possible standdown of the Secret
> >>Service Agents in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.
>
> >Nothing "possible" about it. �It's plainly obvious.
Mark Giolli writes: Even Anthony Marsh does not back up the standdown
scenario. Mark Giolli.

>
> >Embarrassing, isn't it?
>
> >>If anyone has seen this video it is pure fiction.
>
> >A LNT'er has no other option other than to be dishonest.
Mark Giolli writes: I use my objective reasoning in regards to
President Kennedy's death. Every little point the CTs make is based
on stretching the truth and changing evidence to fit a theory. Even a
shrug. Mark Giolli

>
> >The film is what it is - and the description is accurate.
>
> >>This video of the "stand-down" of
> >>the Secret Service is not a stand-down at all.
>
> >Just how else do you describe agents being taken off of their predefined duties?
>
> >>The video is taken
> >>immediately after the limousine is leaving Love Field in Dallas about
> >>40 minutes before President Kennedy is shot in Dealey Plaza. Dealey Plaza was
> >>still a half hour away.
>
> >Do you presume that it would only be damaging to the Secret Service if they had
> >done this 5 minutes before Dealey Plaza? �30 seconds? �Where do *YOU* draw the
> >line?
>
> >>There is a lot of footage of the limousine in
> >>Downtown Dallas (post- Love Field) with Clint Hill on the left rear
> >>step of the trunk on Main Street.
>
> >Clint Hill was not the assigned agent. �He wasn't even *scheduled* to go on the
> >Texas trip... as I recall, he was asked by Jackie.
Mark Giolli writes:so the fact that he was jumping on the back of the
bumper step of the Presidential Limousine shows there was not a
standdown right? Say for example this Agent Rybka was shrugging
because of his frustration at being motioned to standdown ( just for
argument), are you saying a conspiracy is going to be that obvious and
the confusion so clear among SS agents that is would be on a video
which was shown on live Dallas TV? Mark Giolli

>
> >>It is true that President Kennedy
> >>did not like agents on the rear step of the Presidential Limousine,
>
> >No, it's *NOT* true. �Palamara has compiled a good collection of evidence on
> >this point - illustrating that this factoid came ultimately from just one man,
> >SS Agent Boring - WHO DENIED IT!
>
> >>which explains why there were not usually agents on the back step of
> >>the limousine.
>
> >Supporting a factoid with an untruth?
>
> >>That does not mean anything significant except for the
> >>fact that the agents were persuaded or rather were asked not to stand
> >>on the back step too often during the motorcade routes if it was not
> >>necessary.
>
> >Untrue.
>
> >>President Kennedy thought it made visibility to the
> >>President more restrictive with these agents on the back bumper step,
> >>and he wanted the most visibility he could get with the people.
>
> >Pure fiction.
Mark Giolli writes: President Kennedy's friend Charles Bartlett who
introduced Jackie to John Kennedy said that President Kennedy did not
want any lack of visability between himself and the crowd because a
crowd which would not see him in the flesh would not be as inclined to
vote for him. He also said that the SS on the back of the limousine
were a sore spot for the President. I do not have a book citation but
I can find the video somewhere here where he said this. Mark Giolli

>
> >>But this video of a "standdown" is irresponsible and not factually
> >>accurate, so I have to comment on it. The proof that this video is not
> >>based on fact is easily explained. �In the video the narrator says
> >>that an agent who is running beside the Presidential Limousine (1961
> >>Lincoln Continental -directly in front of the followup car I am
> >>discussing) at Love Field Airport (in Dallas, Texas) is told not to
> >>get on the rear bumper step by Secret Service Agent Emory Roberts (who
> >>is on the passenger seat on the followup car to the Presidential
> >>Limousine-This followup car was a 1956 Cadillac dubbed "Queen Mary").
> >>The agent on the road is seen shrugging his shoulders, and the
> >>narrator suggests that Agent Emory Roberts is signaling for him to
> >>standdown or rather not to provide security to his utmost ability. As
> >>suggested in the video narrative, the shrugging is interpreted as a
> >>complaint by the agent on the road to the command by Agent Roberts to
> >>standdown. Purely fictional.
>
> >It is what it is - you can't explain it. �The *FACT* is that this agent was
> >scheduled to be on the rear of JFK's side of the limo - and he was left at the
> >airfield.
>
> >*THAT* is a fact, and nothing you can do will obviate it.

Mark Giolli writes: but that alone does not prove a conspiracy. Mark
Giolli


>
> >>(I suppose what is meant by a "stand-
> >>down" from my interpretation is a passive nonprotection. "Standing" is
> >>probably regarded as utmost protection or on full guard, whereas
> >>"standing-down" is passively letting that guard down).
>
> >Presumably, you've never served in the military. �This is *exactly* the meaning
> >of a standdown.
>
> >Nor is there anything "passive" about it.
>
> >>After the
> >>first shrugging of the agent, the agent then does another shrug and
> >>then a last shrug again to the occupants in the followup car as the
> >>limousines move on down the road and turns right.
>
> >Wonderfully deficient description... merely "shrugging"... every lurker should
> >view it for themselves, and see if *THEY* would describe it as "shrugging".
>
> >"Incredulity" would be a tad more accurate.

Mark Giolli writes: you still cannot turn that into a conspiracy.
Where is the full proof that this supposed standdown led to President
Kennedy's assassination? A rifle on the 6th floor still would have
found it's mark with a guy on the back of the car had the first bullet
hit it the President in the head. Fact is if anyone wants to point to
anything then maybe CTs would point to William Greer not stepping on
the accelerator quick enough which I am sure they have. But even there
he was 54 years old and probably should not have been driving. Still
not proof of a conspiracy. I think the SS are guilty of irresponsible
protection same as the WCR is guilty of haste. Doesn't prove a
conspiracy. I just do not think the mistakes or ineptness of the
Secret Service in Dallas should not be mistaken for a conspiracy.
Mark Giolli

Mark Giolli writes:it still does not prove a conspiracy. Neither does
all the open windows at the Depository. This was 1963 and an attempt
had not been made since 1950 against the life of a President. In
hindsight it is easy to find holes in everything. Had the
assassination occured in Tampa a week before I am sure similar events
and occurances would have created questions- even if at the time the
reasons for these occurances were innocuous. Mark Giolli

Mark Giolli writes: With the story you are saying about Rybka- and
being assigned to stay at Love Field then anyone could surmise that
perhaps his jocular manner with the Agents in the followup car was
sort of a shrug of embarassment to say." I guess this is all I am
going to do today. -Lead the car out of the airport:" Clint Hill was
running at a similar pace on the left side of the car and he did not
jump on the bumper. Also have you seen the distance between the
Presidential Lincoln and the Followup Cadillac? Looks like about 5
feet but let us say 10 feet since the angle of the video makes it
looks closer. How would any Agent jump on the back of that bumper with
that distance between the two cars? Although CTs will say that the
driver Kinney did that to prevent the agent from jumping on the
bumper. But in no way does Agent Rybka look like he is going to jump
on the back of the limousine. Why would he take an order from Roberts
at that moment? Wouldn't Roberts have told him previous so this scene
would not be on Dallas TV? They would have known that years later this
might come out. And Rybka would have just jumped on the back if he
wanted to. He wouldn't have turned back to look for permission from
Roberts. Turning back to ask for permission from Roberts prevented him
from having the time to get on the bumper. Then he would have had to
sprint just to make it onto the Presidential Limousine. Mark Giolli


>
> >>So he leads the car to the entrance
> >>way from the airport gate area where Air Force One lands, and the
> >>limousine goes to this roadway (where the limousine turns right
> >>onto)which then goes out in the direction of Mockingbird Lane which
> >>then starts the motorcade route to Lemmon ave and so forth. How can
> >>you make a standdown out of that?
>
> >How can you lie about him "leading" the limo when he never did this? �Just why
> >would you presume that a Washington based SS agent would be needed to "lead" the
> >Presidential limo in a strange city when you had the local police there?

Mark Giolli writes: Clint Hill is leading the limousine also.
Remember a gate had to be removed to get the car out of the airport at
Love Field. So the agents had to direct the car out of the airport or
at least make sure it went in the correct direction since this was not
a normal path for cars. But it was not fully necessary probably. Mark
Giolli
>
> >> � � In short, every person who should be in the follow up (Queen Mary

> ...
>
> read more �- Hide quoted text -

circuitbr...@yahoo.com

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 2:25:38 AM3/2/08
to
On Mar 1, 10:46 pm, circuitbreaker1...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Mar 1, 10:40�pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:> >>> "What did Lawton and Rybka travel from Washington to do? What was their "duty" at the Airport?" <<<
>
> > Emory Roberts explains their duties in his report of 11/29/63:
>
> > � � � "SA Donald Lawton of 8 a.m.-4 p.m. shift remained at Love Field
> > with SA Warner and Rybka to set up security for the President's
> > departure for Bergstrom AFB, Austin, Texas. The Presidential aircraft
> > was due to depart Dallas at 2:35 p.m.MarkGiolliwrites: Interesting fact considering that is just 12

>
> minutes short of the time Air Force one left Love Field after the
> assassination.  MarkGiolli
>
>
>
>
>
> > The following persons departed Love Field in Secret Service Follow-up
> > car, 679 X and were located in and on running boards of car as
> > follows:
>
> > ATSAIC Emory P. Roberts--front seat--operating radio.
> > SA Samuel Kinney--driving (did an excellent job)
> > Mr. Kenneth O'Donnell, Appointment Secretary to the President, left
> > jump seat.
> > Mr. David Powers, Presidential Aide, right jump seat.
> > SA Glen Bennett, left rear seat.
> > SA George Hickey, right rear seat (manning AR-15 (rifle)
> > SA Clinton Hill, left running board, front.
> > SA William Mclntyre, left running board, behind Hill.
> > SA John D. Ready, right running board, front.
> > SA Paul Landis, right running board behind Ready.
>
> > Note: On shift report for Nov. 22, 1963, I listed SA Rybka as riding
> > in center of rear seat, which was in error, as he was not in car. As
> > mentioned above, he remained at Love Field." -- E. Roberts; 11/29/63
>
> >http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-rober.htm- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Mark Giolli writes:interesting fact about the time just on
coincidence. I am not saying this proves a conspiracy. Mark Giolli

lazu...@webtv.net

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 5:55:01 AM3/2/08
to
You see one thing lone nutters can't do worth a bucket of spit is put
things together-any one thing isolated doesn't mean anything, it is only
when you get 5-6-7 highly supicious things that don't pass the smell
test when the stink gets too much...and there are those things
everywhere-SS-Mob-CIA-Exiles-LBJ-Medical evidence etc. the problem is
there is way too much evidence of conspiracy in so many directions it
has done a number on everybody's mind who has ever looked into this...

Gil Jesus

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 6:49:48 AM3/2/08
to
On Mar 2, 2:25�am, circuitbreaker1...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Mark Giolli writes:interesting fact about the time just on
>
> coincidence. I am not saying this proves a conspiracy. �Mark Giolli-


There comes a point when it is useless to debate with someone deeply
in denial. So deeply in denial, that one refuses to believe what one
sees in a video with one's own two eyes.


When your OPINION of coincidence is compared to the FACTS as we know
them today, it falls apart like a house of cards.


LAST MINUTE CHANGES TO THE MOTORCADE SECURITY

It was a coincidence that agent Henry Rybka was ordered away from the
limo at Love Field by Emory Roberts and subsequently left there ?

From Vince Palamara:

"While leaving Love Field on the way to the heart of Dallas, destiny,
and murder, Agent Roberts rose from his seat and, using his voice and
several hand gestures, forced agent Henry J. Rybka fall back from the
rear area of JFK's limousine, causing a perplexed Rybka to stop and
raise his arms several times in disgust (Rybka would then remain at
the airport during the murder, having been effectively neutralized) --
although Paul Landis made room for him on the right running board of
the follow-up car, Agent Rybka did not budge (17). Although Rybka
worked the follow-up in Houston the day before (18) and was a gun-
carrying protective agent, he was not allowed to do his job on
November 22,1963.

17.WFAA-TV (ABC's Dallas affiliate) on 11/22/63; 25H 787 18. Advance
man Jerry Bruno's notes from the JFK Library in Boston. Agent Henry
Rybka was also on the follow-up car team in San Antonio on 11/21/63.
In addition, the newly-released Cooper film depicts Rybka jumping out
of the follow-up car in Fort Worth on 11/22/63 -- he was the first
agent out of the car. In both cases, Rybka was not the driver.

It was a coincidence and not a lie, that although he was left there,
Agent Rybka was listed in initial reports by Winston Lawson and Emory
Roberts after the assassination as being on the follow-up car ?

It was a coincidence that agent Don Lawton, who rode on the rear
bumper during the Tampa motorcade, was also left at Love Field ?


It was a coincidence that the Secret Service removed the motorcycle


escorts from the sides of the limousine the night before the
assassination ?

It was a coincidence that the Secret Service reduced the number of
motorcycles and moved them back to the rear quarters of the limo on


the night before the assassination ?

It was a coincidence that JOHNSON'S Secret Service detail told the


Dallas motorcycle cops while they were still at Love Field to hold
their positions "no matter what happened" ?

It was a coincidence that the Secret Service removed the general from
the front seat of the limousine on the morning of the assassination ?

From Palamara's interviews of Kennedy's Secret Service Agents

The April 22, 1964 reports from Agents Behn, Boring, Ready, Hill, and
Emory Roberts, alleging, after-the-fact, that President Kennedy had
ordered agents off the rear of the limousine on Novem- ber 18, 1963 in
Tampa, and in other cities. 23 It has to be stated again, and with
some new corroboration to boot: JFK never ordered the agents to do
anything, let alone telling the men to get off the rear of the
limousine. Agents Behn and Boring totally refuted their own (alleged)
reports in conversations with me, while agents Kinney, Youngblood,
Bouck, Noris, Bolden, Lilly, Martineau, plus two recently-interviewed
agents, Don Lawton and Art Godfrey, confirmed the fact that JFK never
ordered the agents to do anything. He was "very cooperative," they
told me. Kenny O'Donnell did not "relay" any orders either, and in
addition, Dave Powers, Marty Underwood, and a new contact, White House
photographer Cecil Stoughton, confirmed to me what all the agents have
told me to date! 24 If you concentrate on the critical time frame in
which these "presidential orders" allegedly occurred, November 18-21,
1963, you can see what peril they caused in Dallas: no protection--as
"requested"--on JFK's side of the car --neither agents on the rear
bumper nor the usual number of motorcycles riding next to JFK,
something that occurred everywhere except Dallas.

23.18H803-809
24. Author's interviews 1992-1996, also The Third Alternative.

THEN, WHEN THE SHOOTING STARTED.....

It was a coincidence that when the shooting started, agents were


ordered not to move ?

Palamara's verification of Roberts' orders:

In Groden and Livingstone's High Treason , (pages 16 and 487 of the
Berkley edition, respectively), it was noted that "Emory Roberts
ordered the agents not to move," which I took to be an unintended
overstatement at the time. So, I decided to read the passage to Sam
Kinney who told me, "Exactly right, and I'm involved in that, too!"
Besides the Love Field recall of Agent Rybka and Dealey Plaza recall
of Ready, Roberts also immobilized the other agents at a critical
juncture in the shooting, causing a non- JFK agent (Clint Hill) to
react too late to do anything but cover the corpse of the President.
31 I believe aides Ken O'Donnell and Dave Powers best summed up the
situation when they wrote:

"Roberts, one of President Kennedy's agents...had decided to switch to
Johnson as soon as Kennedy was shot" (emphasis added. 32 In addition,
four other authors have noted Agent Roberts' "switch of allegiance,"
including Chief Curry! 33

31. Hill described the president's skull defect as located in the
"right rear" with the actual missing piece of skull lying in the back
of the car. This was confirmed to me by Agent Sam Kinney on two
occasions.

32. O'Donnell, Ken, Dave Powers and Joe McCarthy. Johnny We Hardly
Knew Ye (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1970.) p. 32

33. Manchester 165, Curry 36-37, Hepburn 229, Jerry ter Horst, The
Flying White House, p.215


It was a coincidence that when the shooting started, agents looked
"casually" around ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hwx5lx1ow_w

It was a coincidence that when the shooting started, the driver slowed
the limo down ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KnjSEEf3D4

It was a coincidence that the President's bodyguards were up all night
drinking and celebrating with hookers the night before the
assassination ?


What William Manchester reports as having occurred at Parkland on page
170 of his book makes one both sick and repulsed: "Powers and
O'Donnell bounded toward the Lincoln. Powers heard Emory Roberts
shouting at him to stop but disregarded him; a second might save
Kennedy's life [Dave, too bad you weren't on the running board of the
follow-up car...!]...

Emory Roberts brushed past O'Donnell, determined to make sure that
Kennedy was dead. 'Get up,' he said to Jacqueline Kennedy. there was
no reply. She was crooning faintly. From his side Roberts could see
the President's face, so he lifted her elbow for a close look. He
dropped it. To Kellerman, his superior, he said tersely, 'You stay
with Kennedy. I'm going to Johnson.'"

http://www.jfk-assassination.net/palamara/roberts.html


When your OPINION of coincidence is compared to the FACTS as we know
them today, it falls apart like a house of cards.


Gil Jesus

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 7:01:07 AM3/2/08
to
Folks, for what it's worth, "circuitbreaker" isn't just commenting
because he "saw" a standdown video "on the internet".

He has his own Oswald-did-it channel on Youtube.

justm...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 7:09:01 AM3/2/08
to

Ohhhhhhhhh competition for the bigot, Gil Jesus. No wonder you had to
post another cheap Gay-Mart ad.

Gil Jesus

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 7:26:55 AM3/2/08
to
On Mar 2, 7:09�am, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> Ohhhhhhhhh competition for the bigot, Gil Jesus. No wonder you had to
> post another cheap Gay-Mart ad.

The point is that he misrepresented himself in his original post.

Like you, that makes him a LIAR.

muc...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 8:02:12 AM3/2/08
to

You're such a DRAMA QUEEN, Gil. Has Ben finally found a soul mate?

Ben Holmes

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 1:09:57 PM3/2/08
to
In article <4547ab36-e571-4c2f...@i7g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
circuitbr...@yahoo.com says...

>
>On Mar 1, 9:36=EF=BF=BDpm, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
>> I wonder whyMarkhas been unable to answer this?
>>
>> In article <fq6js702...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>>
>>
>> >In article <df8378fb-42da-455e-9d77-b3f16bf49...@62g2000hsn.googlegroups.=

>com>,
>> >circuitbreaker1...@yahoo.com says...
>>
>> >>I saw a video on the internet about a possible standdown of the Secret
>> >>Service Agents in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963.
>>
>> >Nothing "possible" about it. It's plainly obvious.
>
> Mark Giolli writes: Even Anthony Marsh does not back up the standdown
>scenario. Mark Giolli.


Tony is well known as a LNT'er in CT'er's clothing.

Gary Mack is another example...

This is similar to argument by authority, and is meaningless.


>> >Embarrassing, isn't it?
>>
>> >>If anyone has seen this video it is pure fiction.
>>
>> >A LNT'er has no other option other than to be dishonest.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: I use my objective reasoning in regards to
>President Kennedy's death. Every little point the CTs make is based
>on stretching the truth and changing evidence to fit a theory. Even a
>shrug. Mark Giolli


Meaninglessly non-specific.


>> >The film is what it is - and the description is accurate.
>>
>> >>This video of the "stand-down" of
>> >>the Secret Service is not a stand-down at all.
>>
>> >Just how else do you describe agents being taken off of their predefined
>> >duties?


Dead silence...

>> >>The video is taken
>> >>immediately after the limousine is leaving Love Field in Dallas about
>> >>40 minutes before President Kennedy is shot in Dealey Plaza. Dealey
>> >>Plaza was still a half hour away.
>>
>> >Do you presume that it would only be damaging to the Secret Service
>> >if they had done this 5 minutes before Dealey Plaza? 30 seconds?
>> >Where do *YOU* draw the line?


Dead silence...


>> >>There is a lot of footage of the limousine in
>> >>Downtown Dallas (post- Love Field) with Clint Hill on the left rear
>> >>step of the trunk on Main Street.
>>
>> >Clint Hill was not the assigned agent. He wasn't even *scheduled* to
>> >go on the Texas trip... as I recall, he was asked by Jackie.
>
>Mark Giolli writes:so the fact that he was jumping on the back of the
>bumper step of the Presidential Limousine shows there was not a
>standdown right?


What Clint Hill did or did not do has absolutely ZILCH to do with what Lawton
and Rybka were supposed to be doing.


>Say for example this Agent Rybka was shrugging
>because of his frustration at being motioned to standdown ( just for
>argument), are you saying a conspiracy is going to be that obvious and
>the confusion so clear among SS agents that is would be on a video
>which was shown on live Dallas TV? Mark Giolli


Sadly, that's the cross you have to bear.

This explains your obvious lies when describing what is seen in the film.


>> >>It is true that President Kennedy
>> >>did not like agents on the rear step of the Presidential Limousine,
>>
>> >No, it's *NOT* true. Palamara has compiled a good collection of evidence
>> >on this point - illustrating that this factoid came ultimately from just
>> >one man, SS Agent Boring - WHO DENIED IT!


Again, dead silence. It appears that when the topic becomes far too specific,
you're forced to stay silent.

>> >>which explains why there were not usually agents on the back step of
>> >>the limousine.
>>
>> >Supporting a factoid with an untruth?


Again, dead silence. Lurkers interested in this can review Palamara's online
book, "Survivor's Guilt" - where he interviews many SS agents, and you can hear
their policies straight "from the horses' mouth."


>> >>That does not mean anything significant except for the
>> >>fact that the agents were persuaded or rather were asked not to stand
>> >>on the back step too often during the motorcade routes if it was not
>> >>necessary.
>>
>> >Untrue.


Again, dead silence. Perhaps Mark knows that I can quote from Secret Service
agents themselves should he try to lie about this again.

>> >>President Kennedy thought it made visibility to the
>> >>President more restrictive with these agents on the back bumper step,
>> >>and he wanted the most visibility he could get with the people.
>>
>> >Pure fiction.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: President Kennedy's friend Charles Bartlett who
>introduced Jackie to John Kennedy said that President Kennedy did not
>want any lack of visability between himself and the crowd because a
>crowd which would not see him in the flesh would not be as inclined to
>vote for him. He also said that the SS on the back of the limousine
>were a sore spot for the President. I do not have a book citation but
>I can find the video somewhere here where he said this. Mark Giolli


And I can cite a dozen Secret Service agents who stated to the contrary. (Ask if
you want the list of names) When those who are *ACTUALLY INVOLVED* don't know
about this mythical order - you have a tough time trying to sell such a factoid.

But not only the Secret Service was unaware of this mythical "order", so too
were such people as the White House photographer Cecil Stoughton, or the Press
Secretary Pierre Salinger, Congressman Samuael Gibbons (who rode with JFK on the
Tampa trip of 11/18/63), DNC Advance man Martin Underwood, JFK aide David
Powers...

So not only were the Secret Service agents who were DIRECTLY INVOLVED unaware of
any such mythical order - so too were people close to JFK.

This is a LNT'er factoid that never seems to want to die.


>> >>But this video of a "standdown" is irresponsible and not factually
>> >>accurate, so I have to comment on it. The proof that this video is not
>> >>based on fact is easily explained. In the video the narrator says
>> >>that an agent who is running beside the Presidential Limousine (1961
>> >>Lincoln Continental -directly in front of the followup car I am
>> >>discussing) at Love Field Airport (in Dallas, Texas) is told not to
>> >>get on the rear bumper step by Secret Service Agent Emory Roberts (who
>> >>is on the passenger seat on the followup car to the Presidential
>> >>Limousine-This followup car was a 1956 Cadillac dubbed "Queen Mary").
>> >>The agent on the road is seen shrugging his shoulders, and the
>> >>narrator suggests that Agent Emory Roberts is signaling for him to
>> >>standdown or rather not to provide security to his utmost ability. As
>> >>suggested in the video narrative, the shrugging is interpreted as a
>> >>complaint by the agent on the road to the command by Agent Roberts to
>> >>standdown. Purely fictional.
>>
>> >It is what it is - you can't explain it. The *FACT* is that this agent
>> >was scheduled to be on the rear of JFK's side of the limo - and he was
>> >left at the airfield.
>>
>> >*THAT* is a fact, and nothing you can do will obviate it.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: but that alone does not prove a conspiracy. Mark
>Giolli


No, of course not. In combination with other incredible Secret Service
"blunders," it certainly demonstrates a pattern that you can't deny. (Other
than by lying about it, of course)

Rybka was astounded at the last minute change of plans, and plainly showed it.


>> >>(I suppose what is meant by a "stand-
>> >>down" from my interpretation is a passive nonprotection. "Standing" is
>> >>probably regarded as utmost protection or on full guard, whereas
>> >>"standing-down" is passively letting that guard down).
>>
>> >Presumably, you've never served in the military. This is *exactly* the
>> >meaning of a standdown.
>>
>> >Nor is there anything "passive" about it.
>>
>> >>After the
>> >>first shrugging of the agent, the agent then does another shrug and
>> >>then a last shrug again to the occupants in the followup car as the
>> >>limousines move on down the road and turns right.
>>
>> >Wonderfully deficient description... merely "shrugging"... every
>> >lurker should view it for themselves, and see if *THEY* would describe
>> >it as "shrugging".
>>
>> >"Incredulity" would be a tad more accurate.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: you still cannot turn that into a conspiracy.


When you have to lie about the film, you demonstrate the paucity of evidence on
your side.

Nor do you have any *NON* conspiratorial explanation for why Lawton & Rybka were
pulled off of their normally assigned duties at the last minute.

I hardly need to point out that if the Dallas motorcade had had the *SAME*
security measures as the one just days before in Tampa - the assassination would
have been far more difficult to pull off, perhaps even impossible.

Pulling Lawton & Rybka wasn't the only thing done that day to strip SS
protection from JFK.


>Where is the full proof that this supposed standdown led to President
>Kennedy's assassination?


Common sense.


>A rifle on the 6th floor still would have
>found it's mark with a guy on the back of the car had the first bullet
>hit it the President in the head.

The bullets, which struck from the front and sides as well as the back, would
have been greatly inhibited had the motorcycle escort been at the sides, as well
as agents at the rear bumper.

This is so obvious that it seems silly to mention it...

>Fact is if anyone wants to point to
>anything then maybe CTs would point to William Greer not stepping on
>the accelerator quick enough which I am sure they have.

Not merely the accelerator... it would have been nice if he'd not applied the
brakes too.

Plan on disputing and lying about this too?


>But even there
>he was 54 years old and probably should not have been driving. Still
>not proof of a conspiracy. I think the SS are guilty of irresponsible
>protection same as the WCR is guilty of haste. Doesn't prove a
>conspiracy. I just do not think the mistakes or ineptness of the
>Secret Service in Dallas should not be mistaken for a conspiracy.
>Mark Giolli

You don't... but then again, you're a liar.

The average person isn't going to see the Secret Service actions in the same
light.


>> >>So as I said, the
>> >>limousine and the followup Cadillac turn right to exit the Love Field
>> >>runway area (where the President's party landed on Air Force One -and
>> >>also Air Force Two landed with Vice President Johnson previous to the
>> >>President's airplane landing). So the narrative suggests this standing
>> >>down in the sequence of events shown on a short clip of a video taken
>> >>as the limousine leaves Love Field Airport forty minutes before the
>> >>shots were fired in Dealey Plaza.
>>
>> >Yep, that's *exactly* what it was.
>>
>> >Visits are preplanned beginning months in advance... yet here we are,
>> >40 minutes before JFK's death, and they're making unwarranted *changes*
>> >in plan. Just what, do you presume, leaving two SS agents at the airport
>> >actually accomplished? Was the SS afraid of terrorist infiltration of
>> >Airforce One? Deciding at the last minute that the Airport needed
>> >protection more than the President did?


Again, dead silence. Mark has *NO* reasonable explanation - yet an explanation
*MUST* be provided if one wishes to believe in the WCR.

The protection that JFK got in previous motorcades was stripped from him in
Dallas... that's simply a fact. One that Mark can't explain.


>> >What is noticeably absent from this post IS ANY DESCRIPTION THAT
>> >EXPLAINS *WHY* THIS IS HAPPENING. Tis easy, of course, from a CT'ers
>> >viewpoint to describe and *EXPLAIN* these actions ... not so easy for
>> >a LNT'er, indeed; no attempt was made here in this post.


Again, dead silence from our cowardly LNT'er.

Understandable, of course... since there isn't any explanation Mark could
proffer that wouldn't immediately raise howls of laughter.

(Like his concept that Rybka was "leading" the limo by following it...)


>> >>I think this video is the WFAA
>> >>footage of the motorcade at Love Field.
>> >>My take on the video is this..The agent in question who is
>> >>running next to GG-300 (President Kennedy limousine) is not even from
>> >>the followup car. When one looks at the followup Cadillac -two agents
>> >>are on the running boards on each side of the 1956 limousine which is
>> >>accurate and normal.Where was this agent to go?
>>
>> >Perhaps where he was going when he was pulled off?
>
>Mark Giolli writes:it still does not prove a conspiracy.


Once again, your complete *LACK* of explanation for this event is noticeable.

>Neither does
>all the open windows at the Depository. This was 1963 and an attempt
>had not been made since 1950 against the life of a President.

Actually, two attempts had been made in just the weeks preceding Dallas.

So why bother to lie about it? Chicago and Tampa.


>In hindsight it is easy to find holes in everything. Had the
>assassination occured in Tampa a week before I am sure similar events
>and occurances would have created questions

Yep... and I've previously gone into great detail about this. Just for fun,
here it is again:
**********************************************************************
In both the Tampa and Dallas assassination/attempt, the police were looking for
a young man in his 20's, white with a slender build. In Dallas, that patsy
turned out to be Lee Harvey Oswald...

But in the Tampa assassination attempt just four days earlier, and one that was
never known by the Warren Commission, that description had a different name, it
was Gilberto Policarpo Lopez.

Both were white males, twenty-three years old during most of 1963.

Both had returned to America in the summer of 1962 from a Communist country.

Both are said by various sources to have been assets or informants for some U.S.
agency, and both were of interest to Naval Intelligence, who kept files on them.

In mid-1963, both men and their wives moved to another city and then became
involved with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee.

In the summer of 1963, some of their associates saw them as being pro-Castro,
while others saw them as being anti-Castro. Both were living in a city where
there was much anti-Castro activity.

In the summer of 1963, both were involved in fist-fights over "pro-Castro"
statements they made.

Though both appeared at times to be "pro-Castro," neither joined the Communist
Party and neither regularly associated with local Communist Party members.

Both had a Russian connection in their background.

Both were living apart from their wives as a result of marital difficulties.

Both had crossed the border at Nuevo Laredo in the fall of 1963 and made a
mysterious trip to Mexico City, both were under photographic surveillance by the
CIA, both were trying to get to Cuba (Lopez made it, though)

Both went by car on one leg of their Mexico City trip. Neither was a very good
driver and neither man owned a car.

In the fall of 1963, each had a job in the vicinity of JFK's route for one of
his November motorcades.

The week of 11/22/63, both men were in Dallas.

Following the assassination, both men were investigated for involvement - of
course, Lopez's name appears *no-where* in the WCR or 26 volumes.

Declassified documents indicate that both men were the subject of unusual US
intelligence activity. Declassified CIA documents confirm that Lopez was on a
secret "mission" for the US involving Cuba. Its a virtual certainty that LHO
also fits into the same category, IMO.

For years after the assassination, government agencies tried to keep much of the
material about both men classified, even from Congressional committees like the
HSCA. Much still remains classified today, because both were involved in highly
sensitive covert US operations in 1963.

Former Senator Schweiker, who served for eighteen months on the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence, and who chaired, along with Gary Hart, the Church
Committee's subcommittee that looked into the JFK assassination (The first gave
the Senator background information on intelligence, and the second gave the
Senator specific, still classified information on the JFK assassination),
stated: "all the fingerprints I found during my eighteen months on the Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence point to Oswald as being a product of, and
interacting with, the intelligence community." Of course, Bud would simply
label the good Senator a "kook".

If more than just two blacks, in a southern racist city, had seen LHO during the
assassination in the lunchroom, Bud might be calling those who think that
Gilberto Policarpo Lopez is innocent "kooks" right now.

Gilberto Policarpo Lopez... the *other* Lee Harvey Oswald.
**********************************************************************


>- even if at the time the
>reasons for these occurances were innocuous. Mark Giolli
>>
>> >>The two agents on the
>> >>left running board
>> >>were Clint Hill and Bill McIntyre, the two agents on the right running
>> >>board were John Ready on the front and Landis behind him- and they are
>> >>both seen in the video. And in the car can be seen Agent George Hickey
>> >>in the left back seat and Agent Glen Bennett in the right rear seat.
>> >>On the jump seats in front of Hickey and Bennett in the followup car
>> >>are Kenny ODonnell and Dave Powers- aides to President Kennedy. And in
>> >>the front seat Sam Kinney and Emory Roberts. All the agents from the
>> >>followup car which I mention here -which were in Dealey Plaza in the
>> >>followup car during the assassination of President Kennedy 40 minutes
>> >>later,are in the car in the video here at Love Field before the
>> >>President was shot. No other agents were in the car at Dealey Plaza
>> >>during the shooting, that were not in the car at Love Field during the
>> >>said video clip.
>>
>> >I'm sure you thought you had a point with all this... but the fact
>> >still remains that agents were pulled off of their pre-planned and
>> >assigned jobs at what amounts to 'the last minute'.


The silence is deafening...

>> >>This main Secret Service agent (on the right side of the limousine on
>> >>the road at Love Field) which this video describes as being ordered to
>> >>stand down is pointed out numerous times, and is the pivotal character
>> >>in this clip which the narrative suggests is a standdown. This agent
>> >>is not in the followup car in Dealey Plaza and was not in the follow
>> >>up car during the motorcade drive through the streets of Dallas at
>> >>anytime that day.
>>
>> >Of course not - he was ordered *OFF* of his pre-planned assigned
>> >location.
>>
>> >>So, he was not an agent who was in the followup car
>> >>and was not assigned to it.
>>
>> >Nope... nor was he assigned to the press car. Nor was he assigned to
>> >the lead car... he was assigned WHERE HE WAS TAKEN OFF.


More silence...


>> >>He was just directing the limousine out of
>> >>Love Field to start the motorcade.
>>
>> >Pretty neat "leading" when he's following the limo.
>
>Mark Giolli writes: With the story you are saying about Rybka- and
>being assigned to stay at Love Field then anyone could surmise that
>perhaps his jocular manner with the Agents in the followup car was
>sort of a shrug of embarassment to say." I guess this is all I am
>going to do today. -Lead the car out of the airport:"


You still can't explain how Rybka was "leading" a car out of the airport when he
was following behind it.

Do you realize that you're a clown? Are you *trying* to get laughter?


>Clint Hill was
>running at a similar pace on the left side of the car and he did not
>jump on the bumper.


Actually, yes he did. And in Dallas, too. So why bother to lie, Mark? You
*KNOW* I'm only going to point it out.

Mr. SPECTER. At that time what action, if any, did you take?
Mr. HILL. I jumped from the followup car and ran up to the left rear portion of
the automobile with my back toward Mrs. Kennedy viewing those persons on the
left-hand side of the street.
Mr. SPECTER. What action was taken by any other Secret Service agent which you
observed at that time?
Mr. HILL. Special Agent Ready, who was working the forward portion of the right
running board, did the same thing, only on the President's side, placed his back
toward the car, and viewed the people facing the President. Assistant in Charge
Kellerman opened the door of the President's car and stepped out on the street.


Lied, didn't you?


>Also have you seen the distance between the
>Presidential Lincoln and the Followup Cadillac? Looks like about 5
>feet but let us say 10 feet since the angle of the video makes it
>looks closer. How would any Agent jump on the back of that bumper with
>that distance between the two cars?

They provably did. Not only in Dallas, but in *all* motorcades. It was a
standard procedure.

So why bother to lie about it?


>Although CTs will say that the
>driver Kinney did that to prevent the agent from jumping on the
>bumper. But in no way does Agent Rybka look like he is going to jump
>on the back of the limousine.

The procedure was to jog alongside the limo, but when the limo was going to
speed up, to hop on the bumper - where a step and handholds were placed.

When you lie, Mark - you only illustrate that you're a liar... nothing more.


>Why would he take an order from Roberts
>at that moment?

Because Roberts was his superior.


>Wouldn't Roberts have told him previous so this scene
>would not be on Dallas TV?


That *is* the problem you're going to have to answer.


>They would have known that years later this
>might come out. And Rybka would have just jumped on the back if he
>wanted to.


Are you always stupid, or are you just trying to play the clown?

When your boss orders you to stop doing your ordinary duty, you do what you're
told. Rybka & Lawton did.

You can't explain that fact.


>He wouldn't have turned back to look for permission from
>Roberts. Turning back to ask for permission from Roberts prevented him
>from having the time to get on the bumper. Then he would have had to
>sprint just to make it onto the Presidential Limousine. Mark Giolli


Looking more and more stupid, Mark...


>> >>So he leads the car to the entrance
>> >>way from the airport gate area where Air Force One lands, and the
>> >>limousine goes to this roadway (where the limousine turns right
>> >>onto)which then goes out in the direction of Mockingbird Lane which
>> >>then starts the motorcade route to Lemmon ave and so forth. How can
>> >>you make a standdown out of that?
>>
>> >How can you lie about him "leading" the limo when he never did this?
>> >Just why would you presume that a Washington based SS agent would be
>> >needed to "lead" the Presidential limo in a strange city when you
>> >had the local police there?
>
>Mark Giolli writes: Clint Hill is leading the limousine also.


No Mark, he isn't. You don't "lead" from behind.


>Remember a gate had to be removed to get the car out of the airport at
>Love Field. So the agents had to direct the car out of the airport or
>at least make sure it went in the correct direction since this was not
>a normal path for cars. But it was not fully necessary probably. Mark
>Giolli


Dead silence about how Rybka was "leading" the limo from behind.

Lurkers simply aren't this stupid, Mark. You're going to have to retract this
explanation, and come up with a better one.

>> >>In short, every person who should be in the follow up (Queen Mary
>> >>-1956 Cadillac) car for the motorcade can be seen in the video in the
>> >>actual followup car in Love Field when the video clip shows what the
>> >>narrator calls a standdown.
>>
>> >Everyone, that is, except for the two agents pulled off at the last
>> >minute.
>>
>> >>Every Agent and Aide who is in the
>> >>followup car at Love Field in Dallas is in the followup car in Dealey
>> >>Plaza during the assassination forty minutes later, and the running
>> >>boards are full with two agents on each running board.
>>
>> >However, the assigned agents for the rear of the Presidential limo
>> >aren't there.
>>
>> >They were told to standdown.
>>
>> >>So no more
>> >>agents can be on the followup car in either Love Field or Dealey
>> >>Plaza.
>>
>> >This has no bearing on the agents assigned to the rear of JFK's limo.


Simple logic has frozen your tongue...

>> >> That right there makes this"standdown" video non-factual.
>>
>> >Poor logic.
>>
>> >>Why would another agent be assigned to stand on the step if he was not
>> >>from the followup car?
>>
>> >Because he wasn't assigned to the followup car.


More dead silence...


>> >>Maybe people who do not know the case will see
>> >>this and say wow a standdown. But all you have to do is know the
>> >>agents and aides in the followup car and this video is easily
>> >>discounted.
>>
>> >Only by LNT'ers who are easily misled.
>>
>> >Honest people can see it quite

<snipped with no notice... and no further responses...>

Ben Holmes

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 1:22:54 PM3/2/08
to
In article <4f5cb91b-1b44-40a2...@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
circuitbr...@yahoo.com says...

>
>On Mar 1, 10:40=EF=BF=BDpm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >>> "What did Lawton and Rybka travel from Washington to do? What was
>> >>> their "duty" at the Airport?" <<<
>>
>> Emory Roberts explains their duties in his report of 11/29/63:
>>
>> "SA Donald Lawton of 8 a.m.-4 p.m. shift remained at Love Field
>> with SA Warner and Rybka to set up security for the President's
>> departure for Bergstrom AFB, Austin, Texas. The Presidential aircraft
>> was due to depart Dallas at 2:35 p.m.
>Mark Giolli writes: Interesting fact considering that is just 12
>minutes short of the time Air Force one left Love Field after the
>assassination. Mark Giolli


What's even funnier is these two LNT'ers hoping that a week later report by the
man who *ORDERED* Lawton & Rybka off of their normally assigned duties is not
taken with a grain of salt.

What *SHOULD* be presented is the preplanning reports, detailing everyone's
assignments... oops, I guess those were destroyed when the ARRB requested them.

Interestingly, Lawton's duties in the Chicago & Tampa motorcades was on the back
of the Presidential limo. (Those pesky facts just keep stomping on LNT'ers
faith, doesn't it?)


>> The following persons departed Love Field in Secret Service Follow-up
>> car, 679 X and were located in and on running boards of car as
>> follows:
>>
>> ATSAIC Emory P. Roberts--front seat--operating radio.
>> SA Samuel Kinney--driving (did an excellent job)
>> Mr. Kenneth O'Donnell, Appointment Secretary to the President, left
>> jump seat.
>> Mr. David Powers, Presidential Aide, right jump seat.
>> SA Glen Bennett, left rear seat.
>> SA George Hickey, right rear seat (manning AR-15 (rifle)
>> SA Clinton Hill, left running board, front.
>> SA William Mclntyre, left running board, behind Hill.
>> SA John D. Ready, right running board, front.
>> SA Paul Landis, right running board behind Ready.
>>
>> Note: On shift report for Nov. 22, 1963, I listed SA Rybka as riding
>> in center of rear seat, which was in error, as he was not in car. As
>> mentioned above, he remained at Love Field." -- E. Roberts; 11/29/63

He "remained" there because he was ordered there at the last minute. Something
*STILL* unexplained by the LNT'er crowd.


>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-rober.htm

Embarrassingly, these two LNT'ers can't explain why Lawton & Rybka were taken
off of their obviously assigned duties. More importantly, an SS agent who
viewed this same film asserted the same thing - he'd never seen such actions,
and can't explain it either.

CT'ers, of course, have an obvious and clear explanation.

aeffects

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 2:06:36 PM3/2/08
to

amen!

aeffects

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 2:06:53 PM3/2/08
to

the old crone is having a tough day -- tearing Just*puke*me1952 ass up
in other threads....

circuitbr...@yahoo.com

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 6:52:45 PM3/2/08
to
On Mar 2, 4:09 am, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Mar 2, 7:01 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Folks, for what it's worth, "circuitbreaker" isn't just commenting
> > because he "saw" a standdown video "on the internet".
>
> > He has his own Oswald-did-it channel on Youtube.

Mark Giolli writes: Alot of people have videos on youtube. I like
youtube for sharing my videos. I am not really stating much of an
opinion on those videos. I am objectively saying what is on the
videos.Actually I did not see the standdown video on youtube. I know
that Vince Palamara is the leading expert on the subject and I have
seen his videos on there some time ago. I think youtube is a good
place to share videos. So I put mine on. No big thing. I put on
youtube some NBC clips of Bill Ryan and Frank McGee and Chet Huntley
and others. That is not exactly a "Oswald did it channel on Youtube".
That sounds very controversial. I put on videos I like and what I
think others might want to see regardless of what they think about the
assassination. Really the important thing is that people study the
case and it that is done, I do not care if someone believes LNT or CT,
they are helping the case either way.. If my opinions come out that
is not what it is meant to be. I think on some clips of Executive
Action I do say I do not back up the theory of a conspiracy. I put
alot of videos on there for the scenes of Dealey Plaza. I have another
youtube account which has other videos of the Kennedy family. I have
been reading about the Kennedys for 31 years and admire them. I met
President Kennedy's brother Ted Kennedy in 1984 at East Los Angeles
College, and I also talked to Dave Powers and Paul Fay Jr in 1979-who
were President Kennedy's friends. I have commented on this case
before on newsgroups. Mark Giolli

circuitbr...@yahoo.com

unread,
Mar 2, 2008, 7:09:27 PM3/2/08
to
On Mar 2, 4:09 am, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Mar 2, 7:01 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Folks, for what it's worth, "circuitbreaker" isn't just commenting
> > because he "saw" a standdown video "on the internet".
>
> > He has his own Oswald-did-it channel on Youtube.
Mark Giolli writes: I put whatever I feel people will want to see on
there. I try to be as objective as possible. I have read alot about
assassination theories prior to 1992 -then I started to see how they
all were stretches of the truth and nothing ever came out to
anything. . Also eventually these theories are always discounted once
any theory gets any press. That is why the CTs help the case. They
bring up little inconsistencies that are cleared up eventually. It
never really leads to anything. CTs just do not come up with anything
concrete. It would be hard to come up with anything concrete if there
was not a conspiracy though. But my videos are in admiration for
President Kennedy. I have read about his life as well as his death. I
also read about Ted Kennedy and the whole Kennedy family. Mark Giolli

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 3, 2008, 10:20:13 PM3/3/08
to

www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/33edee20e845c2ff/955825a2fb1ff972?#955825a2fb1ff972


>>> "The 2 agents on the right running board did not walk next to the limo as they were supposed to." <<<


Yeah, I guess that FENCE and the PEOPLE WHO WERE WELL BEHIND THE FENCE
at the airport were a major threat to the President as the cars began
to roll at Love Field, huh?

Therefore, it was imperative that all of the running-board agents walk
beside a car that wasn't being approached (or threatened) in ANY way
by spectators.

Now's a good time to re-quote Clint Hill (and this quote undoubtedly
would apply to the RIGHT side of the President's limousine as
well...i.e., JFK's side of the car):

"My instructions for Dallas were to work the left rear of the
Presidential automobile and remain in close proximity to Mrs. John F.
Kennedy at all times. The agent assigned to work the left rear of the
Presidential automobile rides on the forward portion of the left hand
running board of the Secret Service follow-up car and only moves
forward to walk alongside the Presidential automobile when it slows to
such a pace that people can readily approach the auto on foot." --

Clinton Hill; 11/30/63

=======

Trying backpedaling some more on your initial "RYBKA WAS ASSIGNED TO A
RUNNING BOARD" posture, Tony. I enjoy watching a CTer pedal backwards,
instead of merely admitting he was wrong.

Here's my confession of stupidity for today --- I've argued with CTers
about the "Rybka" situation at Love Field several times in the past,
but I never ONCE (prior to just a few days ago) took the time to look
up Emory Roberts' statement, which has no doubt been available online
for a long time:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-rober.htm


I was stupid for never having even taken the trouble to search for
such a report by Roberts (or whoever else might have knowledge of the
SS agents' movements at Love Field on 11/22). And I feel silly now for
having never bothered to research such an easy-to-find piece of
information.

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 4, 2008, 8:41:25 PM3/4/08
to

www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/33edee20e845c2ff


>>> "Rybka was assigned to the back seat of the Queen Mary." <<<

Classic hunk of back-pedaling here.

Let's perform a quick review of recent Tony Marsh statements regarding
the topic of Secret Service Agent Henry Rybka:

"Some dunce SS agent was in Rybka's spot, so when Rybka went to
jump onto the running board there was no room for him and he got left
behind." -- T. Marsh; 02/29/08

"Rybka was assigned to the right running board." -- T. Marsh;
02/29/08


"He {Agent Rybka} was not confused. He was annoyed. Someone was
in his spot on the running board." -- T. Marsh; 02/29/08


"Rybka was assigned to the back seat of the Queen Mary." -- T.
Marsh; 03/04/08

>>> "I would still like to see a chart identifying each agent by name, clothing, appearance. I can not be sure which agent made the mistake and don't want to blame the wrong one." <<<

RUNNING BOARDS:
Left side/Front -- Clint Hill.
Right side/Front -- John Ready.
Left side/Rear -- Bill "Tim" McIntyre.
Right side/Rear -- Paul Landis.

FRONT SEAT:
Sam Kinney (driver).
Emory Roberts.

BACK SEAT:
Glen Bennett.
George Hickey.

JUMP SEATS:
Kennedy aides David Powers and Ken O'Donnell.


www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/3374883466e6f1e9


http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-landi.htm

martyb...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 5, 2008, 6:27:29 PM3/5/08
to
On Mar 4, 5:41 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/33ede...

How can anyone say there was a "Stand down order" when you consider
the fire power the follow up car with all of those agents would have
had at their disposal circa 1963. The tragic lesson learned that will
not be repeated is that it is imposible to fully protect a president
riding in an open limo. If you could have found room for the shoulder
shrugging agent from the airport it wouldn't have made a tinkers darn
in respect to the outcome. If you added the general in the front seat
of the limo it wouldn't have improved the protective capability that
day in Dallas. I guess maybe the sun shinning off his stars could
have blinded LHO preventing him from finding his target but that's
about it!

Marty

lazu...@webtv.net

unread,
Mar 5, 2008, 7:00:29 PM3/5/08
to
Bolden's book Echo From dealey Plaza is now out..should have some
interesting insights into the SS, a culture of racism and drunkeness?

Ben Holmes

unread,
Mar 5, 2008, 8:30:44 PM3/5/08
to
In article <0fb63c6a-5cbc-4605...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
martyb...@gmail.com says...

>
>On Mar 4, 5:41=A0pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/33ede...
>>
>> >>> "Rybka was assigned to the back seat of the Queen Mary." <<<
>>
>> Classic hunk of back-pedaling here.
>>
>> Let's perform a quick review of recent Tony Marsh statements regarding
>> the topic of Secret Service Agent Henry Rybka:
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 "Some dunce SS agent was in Rybka's spot, so when Rybka went t=

>o
>> jump onto the running board there was no room for him and he got left
>> behind." -- T. Marsh; 02/29/08
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 "Rybka was assigned to the right running board." -- T. Marsh;
>> 02/29/08
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 "He {Agent Rybka} was not confused. He was annoyed. Someone wa=

>s
>> in his spot on the running board." -- T. Marsh; 02/29/08
>>
>> =A0 =A0 =A0 "Rybka was assigned to the back seat of the Queen Mary." -- T.=
>
>> Marsh; 03/04/08
>>
>> >>> "I would still like to see a chart identifying each agent by name, clo=
>thing, appearance. I can not be sure which agent made the mistake and don't =

>want to blame the wrong one." <<<
>>
>> RUNNING BOARDS:
>> Left side/Front -- Clint Hill.
>> Right side/Front -- John Ready.
>> Left side/Rear -- Bill "Tim" McIntyre.
>> Right side/Rear -- Paul Landis.
>>
>> FRONT SEAT:
>> Sam Kinney (driver).
>> Emory Roberts.
>>
>> BACK SEAT:
>> Glen Bennett.
>> George Hickey.
>>
>> JUMP SEATS:
>> Kennedy aides David Powers and Ken O'Donnell.
>>
>> www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/3374883466e6f1e9
>>
>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-landi.htm
>
>How can anyone say there was a "Stand down order" when you consider
>the fire power the follow up car with all of those agents would have
>had at their disposal circa 1963.

Because there *WAS* a "standdown".

The normal agents who's position was the back of the limo were taken off their
normal duty. And it's no secret to the Secret Service that one of the major
reasons that JFK was *capable* of being killed was this lack of agents at the
rear of the limo.


>The tragic lesson learned that will
>not be repeated is that it is imposible to fully protect a president
>riding in an open limo.

Particularly if you don't try.

>If you could have found room for the shoulder
>shrugging agent from the airport it wouldn't have made a tinkers darn
>in respect to the outcome.

That's not what Secret Service agents say...

And I'll take *their* expertise over yours any day...

>If you added the general in the front seat
>of the limo it wouldn't have improved the protective capability that
>day in Dallas. I guess maybe the sun shinning off his stars could
>have blinded LHO preventing him from finding his target but that's
>about it!
>
>Marty

Must be embarrassing to have to be this dishonest to uphold your faith...

martyb...@gmail.com

unread,
Mar 5, 2008, 10:15:49 PM3/5/08
to
On Mar 5, 5:30 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
> In article <0fb63c6a-5cbc-4605-9f8d-09d9a6bbf...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> martybaugh...@gmail.com says...
> Must be embarrassing to have to be this dishonest to uphold your faith...- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Oh boy I get to use CT slang. If you take the time Ben to research
pictures of previous presidential motorcades you will find that it
wasn't and get ready because here it comes " standard operating
procedure" to station SS agents on the rear of the presidential limo.
Just like the Dallas motorcade when agents perceived that the crowd
could possibly be thick enough to rush the limo they would then move
to these two rear positions from the Queen Mary to be closer to act in
support of the president. The exception was motorcades that took
place in foreign countrys such as the Berlin motorcade. The follow up
car was packed with SS. Two agents road on the back of the limo. A
full contigent of motorcycle cops surrounded the limo and heck you
even had that general in the front seat as a symbol of a strong
military presence.

Here comes another one, no "stand down order" how catchy is that was
given in Dallas on 11/22/63

Marty

Ben Holmes

unread,
Mar 5, 2008, 10:58:31 PM3/5/08
to
In article <fcc743fc-e946-47d5...@o77g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
martyb...@gmail.com says...
>
>On Mar 5, 5:30=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
>> In article <0fb63c6a-5cbc-4605-9f8d-09d9a6bbf...@e23g2000prf.googlegroups.=
>com>,
>> martybaugh...@gmail.com says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Mar 4, 5:41=3DA0pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >>www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/33ede...=

>
>>
>> >> >>> "Rybka was assigned to the back seat of the Queen Mary." <<<
>>
>> >> Classic hunk of back-pedaling here.
>>
>> >> Let's perform a quick review of recent Tony Marsh statements regarding
>> >> the topic of Secret Service Agent Henry Rybka:
>>
>> >> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 "Some dunce SS agent was in Rybka's spot, so when Ryb=
>ka went t=3D

>> >o
>> >> jump onto the running board there was no room for him and he got left
>> >> behind." -- T. Marsh; 02/29/08
>>
>> >> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 "Rybka was assigned to the right running board." -- T=
>. Marsh;
>> >> 02/29/08
>>
>> >> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 "He {Agent Rybka} was not confused. He was annoyed. S=
>omeone wa=3D

>> >s
>> >> in his spot on the running board." -- T. Marsh; 02/29/08
>>
>> >> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 "Rybka was assigned to the back seat of the Queen Mar=
>y." -- T.=3D
>>
>> >> Marsh; 03/04/08
>>
>> >> >>> "I would still like to see a chart identifying each agent by name, =
>clo=3D
>> >thing, appearance. I can not be sure which agent made the mistake and don=
>'t =3D
>> >day in Dallas. =A0I guess maybe the sun shinning off his stars could

>> >have blinded LHO preventing him from finding his target but that's
>> >about it!
>>
>> >Marty
>>
>> Must be embarrassing to have to be this dishonest to uphold your faith...-
>
>Oh boy I get to use CT slang. If you take the time Ben to research
>pictures of previous presidential motorcades you will find that it
>wasn't and get ready because here it comes " standard operating
>procedure" to station SS agents on the rear of the presidential limo.

When you're willing to lie, all you've proven is that you're a liar. Nothing
more.

How sad that this is the exemplar of LNT'er thought and 'rebuttal'.

cdddraftsman

unread,
Mar 5, 2008, 11:18:29 PM3/5/08
to
On Mar 2, 2:55 am, lazuli...@webtv.net wrote:

The smell of your stench , as you misuse and mishandle evidence
and data , is overwhelming .

tl

circuitbr...@yahoo.com

unread,
Mar 6, 2008, 1:05:17 AM3/6/08
to
On Mar 5, 8:18�pm, cdddraftsman <cdddrafts...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I am not responding to the thread as much as telling you people what I found on the internet which most of you probably know about. It relates to this topic in a way since it shows many of the agents. But these are videos anyone interested on that day should watch. Here is a tv station website with the coverage of the Kennedy's in November 1963. They have 3 sections on Love Field prior to Air Force One landing and and then up to when the Limousine leaves Love Field. In one of the videos they show agents getting off of Air Force one and this agent Rybka is walking off of the AF1. Here is the link. Very complete and unedited mostly.
http://media.myfoxdfw.com/JFKvideo Mark Giolli

cdddraftsman

unread,
Apr 2, 2008, 3:29:11 AM4/2/08
to
On Mar 2, 11:22 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@khadaji.com> wrote:
> In article <4f5cb91b-1b44-40a2-8cae-025e5818f...@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> circuitbreaker1...@yahoo.com says...

Ya there complete assholes many times over .

a) If Rybka's assigned spot was on the rear bumper of JFK's limo ,
what the fuck was he doing running along side the limo and not in this
mythical assigned spot per Ben 'I wanna wanna wanna wanna wann be be
be a wanna be conspiracists' Holmes ?

b) What prevented him from hopping on the bumper of the presidential
limo were there were no other agents present , just two empty ,
inviting positions he could of taken on his own initiative ?

c) What prevented him from hopping on one of the other cars in the
motorcade and catching up later with the SS follow up car when the
opportunity presented itself ?

c) What prevented him from using 'common sense' to solve his
predicament is unknown , what is known is that people like
scumbuggerer Gil Jesus , Ginny Pudswackermeyer and Ben 'I wanna wanna
wanna wanna wann be be be a wanna be conspiracists' Holmes have struck
out again and fallen flat on their bopped clowny face's . Think about
it ?

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/threa...

[My comments ]


Lie # 1 :


Gil On .........


" It was a coincidence that agent Henry Rybka was ordered away from
the limo at Love Field by Emory Roberts and subsequently left there ?
"


[ Is Gil so stupid as to think that Rybka was going to run the entire
20 miles to Dealey Plaza along side the presidents limo ? It's most
likely that as the limo started picking up speed that Rybka was going
to be left behind if someone didn't tell him to get his act
together .
There comes a point when it is useless to debate with someone as
deeply in denial as Gil Jesus . So deeply in denial , that he refuses
to believe what he sees in a video with his own two eyes ! ]


" From Vince Palamara " :


"While leaving Love Field on the way to the heart of Dallas, destiny,
and murder, Agent Roberts rose from his seat and, using his voice and
several hand gestures, forced agent Henry J. Rybka fall back from the
rear area of JFK's limousine, causing a perplexed Rybka to stop and

raise his arms several times in disgust , Rybka would then remain at
the airport during the murder, having been effectively neutralized ".


[ Rybka had effectively neutralized himself by not realising his
surroundings were not condusive to him running along side the
presidential limo when :


a) He was not needed at that point , to be there , there were no
crowds close enough to be a threat and the motorcade was starting to
pick up speed .
b) Again , both agents were walking next two the limousine until it
started picking up speed . Clint Hill pulled back and jumped onto the
running board .
c) Rybka could not because his assigned spot was not empty .
d) So he threw up his hands in frustration . The other agent was in
the process of getting into the car when they left Rybka behind .
e) The fault lies with that agent , but he probably did not think
there was room for him in the car
because just on that day they had a couple of extra passengers , two
Presidential aides .
f) You can then see that SS agent on the running board realize his
mistake and step into the rear seat compartment . Too late though .
He
(Rybka) gave up " .


Here are six more lie's in quick sucession , because he's built his
shaky foundation upon unfounded speculation , he trys the snowball
technique of keeping the ball rolling and not giving a person time to
"Think about it " : ]


Lie # 2 :


It was a coincidence and not a lie, that although he was left there,
Agent Rybka was listed in initial reports by Winston Lawson and Emory
Roberts after the assassination as being on the follow-up car ?


Lie # 3 :


It was a coincidence that agent Don Lawton, who rode on the rear
bumper during the Tampa motorcade, was also left at Love Field ?


Lie # 4 :


It was a coincidence that the Secret Service removed the motorcycle
escorts from the sides of the limousine the night before the
assassination ?


Lie # 5 :


It was a coincidence that the Secret Service reduced the number of
motorcycles and moved them back to the rear quarters of the limo on
the night before the assassination ?


Lie # 6 :


It was a coincidence that JOHNSON'S Secret Service detail told the
Dallas motorcycle cops while they were still at Love Field to hold
their positions "no matter what happened" ?


Lie # 7 (*) :


It was a coincidence that the Secret Service removed the general from
the front seat of the limousine on the morning of the assassination ?


end ...............


[ Of course the real question is :


Is it any coincidence that Gil Jesus has to disable all ratings and
comments after telling 7 Big Whoppers in a row ? Think about it ?


tl ]


(*) Gil implys that if a Military General is sitting in the front
seat
this would have a deterring effect
against any assassin equiped with a high power rifle with a
telescopic
scope , by letting it be known there was a military presence
protecting the president ?


Go figure ?


Stupid ...


Yes !


0 new messages