• Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
William Kelly

Secret Service Destroys Records

32 posts in this topic

Doug Horne IARRB Chapter 15

THE DESTRUCTION OF KEY DOCUMENTS BY THE SECRET SERVICE IN 1995 SUGGESTED THAT THE SECRET SERVICE COVER-UP OF ITS OWN MALFEASANCE CONTINUED, MORE THAN 30 YEARS AFTER THE ASSASSINATION

In 1995, the Review Board Staff became aware that the U.S. Secret Service had destroyed protective survey reports related to John F. Kennedy's Presidency, and that they had done so well after the passage of the JFK Records Act, and well after having been briefed by the National Archives (NARA) on the Act's requirements to preserve all Assassination Records from destruction until the ARRB had made a determination that any such proposed destruction was acceptable.

I reported to work at the ARRB on August 7, 1995, and I still distinctly recall that this controversy was raging full force during the first two weeks I was on the job. I recall both General Counsel Jeremy Gunn and Executive Director David Marwell being particularly upset; they were seriously considering holding public hearings in which the Secret Service officials responsible for said destruction would be called to account and castigated, in an open forum, with the media present.

The thinking at the time was that doing so would: (a) cause the Secret Service to take the Review Board and the JFK Act seriously; and (send a warning to other government agencies, such as the FBI and the CIA, to also take the Review Board and the JFK Act seriously, lest they, too be dragged into public hearings that would cause great discomfiture and professional embarrassment.

Eventually—and unfortunately—tempers cooled and no public hearings were held. I suspect that Board Chair Jack Tunheim played a major role in finessing the matter; presumably, the Board Members believed that since the ARRB was still in the first year of its three-year effort to locate and review assassination records, that we would get more out of the Secret Service in the future with honey, than with vinegar. Stern official letters levying charges and counter-charges were exchanged; a face-to-face meeting between high-level officials of the ARRB and Secret Service was held; tempers cooled; and no public hearings were ever held. Relations with the Secret Service remained testy throughout the remainder of the ARRB's lifespan. It was my impression, during my ongoing discussions with my fellow analysts on the Secret Service Records team for the next three years (from September 1995 to September 1998), that the Secret Service never "loosened up" and reached a comfortable working accommodation with the ARRB like the FBI, the CIA, and the Pentagon (or, at least the Joint Staff Secretariat) did. The Secret Service and the ARRB remained wary adversaries for four years.

The Review Board itself consciously soft-pedaled the dispute in its Final Report, devoting only one paragraph (and virtually no details whatsoever) to the incident, on page 149: Congress passed the JFK Act in 1992. One month later, the Secret Service began its compliance efforts. However, in January 1995, the Secret Service destroyed Presidential protection survey reports for some of President Kennedy's trips in the fall of 1963. The Review Board learned of the destruction approximately one week after the Secret Service destroyed them, when the Board was drafting its request for additional information. The Board believed that the Secret Service files on the President's travel in the weeks preceding his murder would be relevant.

And that was it—that was the only mention of the entire imbroglio in the Final Report of the Assassination Records Review Board. My intention here is to give the reader as much additional, and relevant, information as I can at this writing, 14 years later. I was never "on the inside" of this problem, but I do have a correspondence file of the letters exchanged, and will quote from them liberally to give the reader a sense of what it feels and sounds like when two bureaucracies go to war inside the Beltway. This is of more than mere academic interest, since the evidence presented in this chapter has shown that several Secret Service officials on the White House Detail were complicit in both the President's death—due to willful actions that greatly lessened the physical security around President Kennedy during the Dallas motorcade—and in the coverup of the damage to the limousine, which, if left in its original damaged condition, would have proved JFK was caught in a crossfire, and therefore killed by a conspiracy.

A Summary of the Records Destroyed by the Secret Service in January of 1995

The Protective Survey Reports destroyed by the Secret Service in January of 1995 were part of a group of records transferred by the Secret Service itself to the General Services Administration's Washington National Records Center in Suitland, Maryland on August 7, 1974 under accession number 87-75-4. The instructions on the SF-135 ("Records Transmittal and Receipt" form) were: "Retain permanently for eventual transfer to the National Archives or a Presidential Library." There were six boxes transferred under this accession number, and the two that were destroyed in January of 1995 contained the following files:

Box 1: Protection of the President (John F. Kennedy)

• Andrews Air Force Base 1961 (Arrivals and Departures)

• Andrews Air Force Base 1962 (Arrivals and Departures)

• Andrews Air Force Base 1963 (Arrivals and Departures)

• Arlington National Cemetery

• Camp David

• The Capital

• Churches

• D.C. National Guard Armory

• D.C. Stadium

• Departures from South Grounds

• Dulles International Airport

1452

• Embassies

• Executive Office Building

• Golf Clubs

• Griffith Stadium

• Homes of Friends

• International Inn

• Mayflower Hotel (three folders, for 1961-63)

• National Press Club

• Other Places Folders (#s 1-4, from January 1961-December of 1962)

Box 6: Protective Survey Reports for the following trips:

• Duluth, Minnesota (9-24-63)

• Ashland, Wisconsin (9-24-63)

• Billings, Montana (9-25-63)

• Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming (9-25-63)

• Cheyenne, Wyoming (9-25-63)

• Grand Forks, North Dakota (9-25-63)

• Laramie, Wyoming (9-25-63)

• Salt Lake City, Utah (9-26-63)

• Great Falls, Montana (9-26-63)

• Hanford, Washington (9-26-63)

• Tongue Point, Oregon (9-27-63)

• Redding, California (9-27-63)

• Tacoma, Washington (9-27-63)

• Palm Springs, California (9-28-63)

• Las Vegas, Nevada (9-28-63)

• Heber Springs, Arkansas (10-3-63)

• Little Rock, Arkansas (10-3-63)

• University of Maine (10-19-63)

• Boston, Massachusetts (10-19-63)

• Amherst, Massachusetts (10-26-63)

• Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (10-30-63)

Chicago, Illinois (11-2-63): Three Folders [TRIP CANCELLED]

• New York City (11-8-63)

In addition, one folder of vital records was missing from Box 2 in this accession, titled: "Other Places Folder # 6" (for the period July-November 1963). Clearly, withholding these two boxes of materials from any investigator would have kept that investigator from learning about normal protective procedures and concerns related to everyday activities throughout the Kennedy Presidency, and would furthermore have denied the investigator comparative knowledge regarding how JFK was protected in numerous venues just prior to the trip to Texas. Perhaps the reader can better understand now why Jeremy Gunn and David Marwell were so upset with the Secret Service. The records were destroyed in the fourth month following the establishment of the ARRB, and furthermore had originally been tagged: "Retain permanently for eventual transfer to the National Archives or a Presidential Library." Their destruction occurred long after the Secret Service was initially briefed on the requirements of the JFK Records Act in December of 1992 by the NARA staff, and required willful action by officials within that agency; it was hardly an accident. The Secret Service clearly didn't want the ARRB poking into its past procedures and practices; the agency had been the recipient of severe criticism in the HSCA's 1979 Report, and apparently did not wish to repeat that experience, or to have its sealed records released to the Archives for placement in the JFK Records Collection, for all JFK researchers to peruse in the future.

Chronology of Letters Exchanged Between the ARRB and the U.S. Secret Service Over the Destruction of Protective Survey Reports

On July 25, 1995 Review Board Chairman John R. Tunheim sent a powerfully worded letter to the Director of the U.S. Secret Service registering the Review Board's displeasure about its recent discovery that the two boxes in question had been destroyed over half a year previously. A letter from Board Chair Jack Tunheim (rather than David Marwell or Jeremy Gunn) addressed directly to the Head of the Secret Service (instead of to the administrative officials with whom the ARRB staff had been dealing) was a powerful signal that the Review Board was immensely displeased and took the matter very seriously. Some key passages in Jack Tunheim's letter are quoted below:

In January of this year, Dr. Jeremy Gunn of the Review Board staff requested of John Machado and Ann Parker of the Secret Service that the six boxes in the accession be made available for his review to evaluate the importance of the material for the JFK Collection in the Archives. Although four of the boxes were made available, we were not provided with boxes (1) and (6), the two most important boxes. On February 7, 1995—and several times thereafter—Mr. Machado and Ms. Parker informed us that the Federal Records Center "could not locate" the two missing boxes...Although we repeatedly were told that special requests for these records had been made at the Federal Records Center, Ms. Ann Parker of the Secret Service finally informed Dr. Joan Zimmerman of the Review Board staff, on July 19, 1995—six months after we had first requested the boxes—that the records had in fact been destroyed in January of this year at approximately the same time that we had requested them.

Tunheim's letter requested full accounting of what had happened to the two boxes; a listing of all other Secret Service records pertaining to President Kennedy that had ever been destroyed; and instructed the Secret Service not to destroy any records of any kind relating to President Kennedy or his assassination without first allowing the Review Board and its staff to review them for relevance. For added emphasis a copy of the letter was sent to the Chief Counsel of the U.S. Secret Service, as well as to John Machado, the apparent culprit who presumably gave the orders to destroy the records.

The Secret Service made an immediate attempt to de-escalate the matter by assigning an official named W. Ralph Basham, its Assistant Director of Administration, to reply. Basham's reply, dated July 31, 1995, was a five-and-one-half page single-spaced attempt at obfuscation, the administrative equivalent of a Senate filibuster, to use a legislative analogy. In addition to saying, in so many words, 'Hey, we didn't do anything wrong, we were following routine destruction procedures established years ago,' the Secret Service attempted to wiggle out of its predicament by simultaneously suggesting that perhaps the destruction was really the Review Board's fault because

it was not in receipt of the ARRB's expanded definition of what constituted an "assassination record" until February of 1995, after the records were destroyed. Perhaps most disturbing of all was the narrow definition that the Secret Service had used commencing in December of 1992 (following its NARA briefing on the JFK Records Act) to define what constituted an assassination record: namely, White House detail shift reports only for the period November 18, 1963 to November 24, 1963. Mr. Basham also tried to downplay the significance of the missing Chicago protective survey reports for the cancelled November 2, 1963 trip (during which conspirators had planned to assassinate President Kennedy) by writing:

The folder concerning the canceled trip to Chicago would only have contained a preliminary survey report, if any document at all, since final reports are not conducted when a trip is cancelled. This report, if in fact it was even in the prepared folder, would have been of limited scope. [Author's comments: there were 3 folders on the cancelled Chicago trip, not one, and this attempt to portray the Chicago file as one folder was duplicitous; furthermore, how did Basham presume to know that any reports written about the cancellation of the Chicago trip would have been "of limited scope?" It is easy to make such a claim after evidence is destroyed, because there is no way you can be challenged.]

The ARRB's response to this "in your face" piece of administrative obfuscation was signed out by Executive Director David G. Marwell on August 7, 1995, and showed no mercy. Rather than simply allow the matter to "go away" or "die," as the Secret Service had hoped, Marwell's letter (co-drafted by him and Gunn) resurrected the seriousness of the matter in no uncertain terms. I quote below, in part:

Although you concluded your letter by stating that you "trust this explanation will clarify any misunderstandings that may have arisen," I regret to say that not only does your letter not allay our concerns, it compounds them.

The President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act (JFK Act) forbids the destruction of any documents "created or made available for use by, obtained by, or [that] otherwise came into the possession of...the Select Committee on Assassinations...of the House of Representatives." It is our understanding that the records in Accession 87-75-0004 that the Secret Service destroyed were examined by the House Select Committee on Assassinations and thus were "assassination records" under the JFK Act and they apparently were destroyed in violation of law. [emphasis in original, which is most unusual in official government correspondence—it is the equivalent of shouting at someone during a conversation]

We see the destruction of these assassination records as particularly ominous in light of the fact that the Secret Service revised its destruction schedule after passage of the JFK Act and that it targeted for destruction records that, at the time the law was passed, were slated to be held "permanently." [emphasis in original]

Rather than referring to and applying the standards of the JFK Act, your letter suggests that the responsibilities of the Secret Service extend no further than complying with standard records disposal schedules. After acknowledging that the Secret Service in fact destroyed records in 1995 from Accession 87-75-0004 (related to the protection of President Kennedy), you state that they were "processed in accordance with National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) procedures, and in full compliance with approved records disposition schedules." The JFK Act, it should be clear, supercedes any law or any disposition schedule related to "assassination records."

This was a "right back in your face" response that told the masters of obfuscation at the Secret Service that the ARRB wasn't going to be rolled, and wasn't going to go away. Marwell's letter then upped the ante by requesting a ton of information which any Federal agency would have had a difficult time finding the resources to accomplish. Marwell's letter ended with these words:

1456

...we specifically request that you assure us that no Secret Service records related to Presidential protection between 1958 and 1969 or to the assassination of President Kennedy be destroyed until the Review Board has received prior written notice and has had an opportunity to inspect the records. [emphasis in original]

Sensing that the ARRB was flexing its muscles and was about to "go nuclear" [which was true—public hearings were being considered], Mr. Basham replied on August 15, 1995 with a calming one-page letter and requested a meeting to discuss the "additional issues" which he said were raised in Marwell's letter. That meeting was held the very next day (August 16, 1995) on ARRB turf, in our offices at 600 E Street, in Northwest Washington D.C.

Following the meeting, which lasted several hours, Jeremy Gunn (our General Counsel and Head of Research and Analysis) signed out a letter on August 21, 1995 to Mr. Basham and Mr. Personnette (Deputy Chief Counsel) of the Secret Service. Gunn recognized for the record that the Secret Service now had a much better understanding of what constituted an assassination record—the ARRB set the definition for this, not the agencies holding records, who all wished to minimize their work—and noted for the record that the Secret Service had agreed that no records related to Presidential protection for the years 1958-1969 would be destroyed until after the ARRB had a chance to review them to verify that no assassination records were included. Gunn also recorded the agreement reached on August 16, 1995, that Dr. Joan Zimmerman of our staff would henceforth have full access to all Secret Service records upon demand, not just partial and limited access, as previously. The ARRB threw a face-saving bone to the Secret Service in Gunn's letter, as well:

As acknowledged in the meeting, we fully understand and accept your interest in ensuring that no documents are released that would compromise Presidential protection. As we have mentioned before, our professional staff is in possession of current security clearances and we will take all appropriate measures to safeguard the records and ensure full compliance with the law.

On the same date, August 21, 1995, Gunn signed out a letter to the miscreant John Machado (who had ordered the two boxes destroyed), which was much less friendly in tone and which bored in on him with a number of questions about dubious statements previously made by Machado, and made additional requests for information and records.

The crisis had abated, and the Secret Service had avoided embarrassing public hearings which would have exposed their perfidy. The public was not to learn of this business until that one cryptic paragraph was published in the ARRB Final Report in late September of 1998, three years later.

Unlike poor JFK, whom corrupt individuals in the Secret Service had helped to set up in Dallas in 1963, the Secret Service, in 1995, had 'dodged a bullet.'

Professor Jim Fetzer summed up the situation nicely with his comments in the documentary "The Smoking Guns," which aired on the History Channel in 2003:

The Secret Service...deliberately destroyed...records that would have revealed that the motorcade in Dallas was a travesty, a violation of at least 15 different Secret Service policies for Presidential protection. This behavior on their part raises the most serious and deserving questions about their complicity in the entire affair...which of course, is the reason why the Secret Service destroyed the records of its own motorcades when they were asked for them by the Assassination Records Review Board.45

1457

Edited by William Kelly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like the ARRB was playing hardball,but Walter Johnson was pitching.

Edited by Michael Crane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds like the ARRB was playing hardball,but Walter Johnson was pitching.

So does that mean that now, even though we know that the Secret Service was ordered to cease protection of the President and that we can see their inaction in Dealy as clear as the sun shines, that history will insist they were just "slow to react" because government records, records of THE PEOPLE , were destroyed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually,what I was implying is that the ARRB was going up against one of the best pitchers in baseball who happens to hold the all-time record with 110 shut outs.

Hard to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually,what I was implying is that the ARRB was going up against one of the best pitchers in baseball who happens to hold the all-time record with 110 shut outs.

Hard to win.

No, it's more like the ARRB brought a knife to a gun fight.

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually,what I was implying is that the ARRB was going up against one of the best pitchers in baseball who happens to hold the all-time record with 110 shut outs.

Hard to win.

No, it's more like the ARRB brought a knife to a gun fight.

BK

Bill: It sure as hell destroyed the ability of some damn good researchers to confirm various matters of information they had received from many operatives over a long period of time. That to me is the most unforgiving aspects of the act. The recorded events, as we know them today, are based upon a series of false and misleading information, inserted into the record because of those destroyed documents. History is written by those in power and their special interest cronies, and has nothing to do with truth. Its a shame we take our truths from books and media reports written by them; and we hoard and covet the documents placed by them and then, in time, we record them as FACTS.

Edited by William Plumlee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

U E Baughman

P5) Joachim Joesten, How Kennedy Was Killed (1968)

One of the most eminent authorities on the subject, former Secret Service chief U.E. Baughman, who headed that agency from 1948 to 1961, has publicly taken issue, in several newspaper interviews, with the lack of adequate precautions which is so painfully apparent in the Dallas tragedy.

A UPI dispatch from Washington, dated December 8, 1963 quoted Mr. Baughman as saying that "there are a lot of things' to be explained" concerning the assassination.

One thing Baughman wanted to know - nobody has explained it yet - is why Lee H. Oswald was permitted to leave

the Book Depository after the shooting.

He asked, also, assuming that the shots did come from the sixth-floor window of that building, why the Secret Service didn't immediately pepper that -window with machine gun fire?

This is one of the most obvious - and least asked - of all "unanswered questions" about the Kennedy murder. Why, indeed, was all the shooting done only by one side - that of the assassins?

There were dozens of Secret Service men on the scene, all former FBI agents and tested marksmen, quick on the trigger and with their service guns and submachine guns at the ready - to say nothing of the hundreds of Dallas policemen who were also present when the President died in a hail of bullets. And not a single shot was fired by any of these alert guardians of the law! Had the Secret Service men reacted as Baugham says they should have, by instantly 'peppering' the TSBD window with machine gun fire, the sniper crouching behind that window would certainly not have been able to get off a second or third shot, as the Commission says he did.

In a subsequent interview with Seth Kantor of the Scripps-Howard newspaper chain, Mr. Baughman declared that it was a "basic, established rule" of the Secret Service to see to it that people were kept out of the upper stories of buildings along a presidential parade route. The manager of the Texas School Book Depository therefore "should have been under firm instructions by the police" to close the upper floors of that building to unauthorized persons...

The Secret Service couldn't spare a man either for checking the grassy knoll, a textbook location for a guerilla-type ambush. This breathtaking deficiency came to light when there were reports that a man who identified himself as a member of the Secret Service was encountered near the knoll just after the assassination. These reports drew a firm denial from the Secret Service which stated explicitly that it had no man posted there.

It would have been better for the Secret Service to have said that the knoll had been swarming with agents who didn't notice a damn thing than thus to admit another such glaring dereliction of duty.

Edited by Peter McGuire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
U E Baughman

P5) Joachim Joesten, How Kennedy Was Killed (1968)

One of the most eminent authorities on the subject, former Secret Service chief U.E. Baughman, who headed that agency from 1948 to 1961, has publicly taken issue, in several newspaper interviews, with the lack of adequate precautions which is so painfully apparent in the Dallas tragedy.

A UPI dispatch from Washington, dated December 8, 1963 quoted Mr. Baughman as saying that "there are a lot of things' to be explained" concerning the assassination.

One thing Baughman wanted to know - nobody has explained it yet - is why Lee H. Oswald was permitted to leave

the Book Depository after the shooting.

He asked, also, assuming that the shots did come from the sixth-floor window of that building, why the Secret Service didn't immediately pepper that -window with machine gun fire?

This is one of the most obvious - and least asked - of all "unanswered questions" about the Kennedy murder. Why, indeed, was all the shooting done only by one side - that of the assassins?

There were dozens of Secret Service men on the scene, all former FBI agents and tested marksmen, quick on the trigger and with their service guns and submachine guns at the ready - to say nothing of the hundreds of Dallas policemen who were also present when the President died in a hail of bullets. And not a single shot was fired by any of these alert guardians of the law! Had the Secret Service men reacted as Baugham says they should have, by instantly 'peppering' the TSBD window with machine gun fire, the sniper crouching behind that window would certainly not have been able to get off a second or third shot, as the Commission says he did.

In a subsequent interview with Seth Kantor of the Scripps-Howard newspaper chain, Mr. Baughman declared that it was a "basic, established rule" of the Secret Service to see to it that people were kept out of the upper stories of buildings along a presidential parade route. The manager of the Texas School Book Depository therefore "should have been under firm instructions by the police" to close the upper floors of that building to unauthorized persons...

The Secret Service couldn't spare a man either for checking the grassy knoll, a textbook location for a guerilla-type ambush. This breathtaking deficiency came to light when there were reports that a man who identified himself as a member of the Secret Service was encountered near the knoll just after the assassination. These reports drew a firm denial from the Secret Service which stated explicitly that it had no man posted there.

It would have been better for the Secret Service to have said that the knoll had been swarming with agents who didn't notice a damn thing than thus to admit another such glaring dereliction of duty.

Well. What's been done has been done. Its like crying over spilled milk. I wonder how this effects the truth of the events of that day, being we base everything on what the government has said in one form or another as to the events of that day. And too, we write books based on those statements and the statements of those agents and others who got most of their information from their documents. They in turn establish the record and the history. We quote them and their pages as facts..., facts that in reality destroy truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well. What's been done has been done. Its like crying over spilled milk. I wonder how this effects the truth of the events of that day, ....

"Like crying over spilled milk"!

This is what you say as a man in the know, about what happened in your favorite area of Dealy, the grassy/south knoll area?

"How this effects the truth of the day" This from a man who supposedly believes in conspiracy!

"What’s been done has been done”! Now that’s the best one. By saying that, we may all just as well not be here discussing this case.

Your nickname is "Tosh" right? The man who was in an "Abort Team" from the government which means you admit prior knowledge of the assassination. The man that has members here waiting with baited breath for the next tidbit of information about one of your ops. The man born in 1909 according to your profile.

On the other hand, a man in the know, Mark Lane, has a book is available on EBay for a buck plus postage. It is worth a lot more. He writes:

"It has been clearly evident for years that the AMERICAN PUBLIC, AND THE people of the world, do not believe that Lee Harvey Oswald killed John F Kennedy, President of the United States of America, on November 22, 1963. Their belief is well founded. The evidence is on their side. It is on the side of truth.

Clearly, the American people believe that this is not about "spilled milk."

Edited by Peter McGuire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well. What's been done has been done. Its like crying over spilled milk. I wonder how this effects the truth of the events of that day, ....

"Like crying over spilled milk" ! This is what you say from a man in the know about what happened in your favorite area of Dealy, the grassy/south knoll area?

"how this effects the truth of the day" This from a man who supposedly outd sold out at the expense of EGOs and so called experts.

"whats been done has been done" ! Now thats is the best one. Saying that we may all just as well not be here.

Your nickname is "Tosh" right? The man who was in an "Abort Team" from the government which means you admit prior knowledge of the assassination. The man that has members here waiting with baited breath for the next tidbit of information about one of your ops. The man born in 09.

Too bad a man in the know, Mark Lane's book is available on Ebay for a buck plus postage. He writes:

"It has been clearly evident for years that the AMERICAN PUBLIC, AND THE people of the world, do not believe that Lee Harvey Oswald killed John F Kennedy, President of the United States of America, on November 22, 1963. Their belief is well founded. The evidence is on their side. It is on the side of truth.

"... The man who was in an "Abort Team" from the government which means you admit prior knowledge of the assassination. ..".

Damn right I do and I have told anyone that would listen that.

Clearly, the American people believe that this is not about "spilled milk."

Got cha' pissed off a little.. Right? Well good. We all should be pissed off because of the past tampering and destruction of files and documents that could and would prove matters relating to the cold blooded murder of a sitting President of forty plus years ago.

I haver been hollowing at the top of my lungs and shouting from the roof tops for over forty years, only to be snuffed out and sold out at the expense of EGOs and the so called experts and gate keepers.. The post was perhaps an awkward attempt to point out that truth was blocked by the Secret Service and other Federal agencies who had much to gain by the cover up The intent of the post was not to make light of the matter. We should all be ashamed of ourselves for letting this get to this level after all these years, by saying things, like, "OH! Well. Thats the way the cookie crumbles, or, "spilt milk"... its good your pissed... welcome to the club, my friend. Now take your Passion and write your Congressman, Your Senators, and whoever. Do something.

As for my believing in a conspiracy. I don't believe... I KNOW. Thanks for your interest... focus and do something about it.

P.S Go back to post #6 and re read:

"...

Bill: It sure as hell destroyed the ability of some damn good researchers to confirm various matters of information they had received from many operatives over a long period of time. That to me is the most unforgiving aspects of the act. The recorded events, as we know them today, are based upon a series of false and misleading information, inserted into the record because of those destroyed documents. History is written by those in power and their special interest cronies, and has nothing to do with truth. Its a shame we take our truths from books and media reports written by them; and we hoard and covet the documents placed by them and then, in time, we record them as FACTS. ...".

OH well, what the hell..., who cares?

This post has been edited by William Plumlee: Feb 27 2010, 07:10 PM

Edited by William Plumlee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Bill, for posting this important info.

To those of you who think the Secret Service wasn't involved in the assassination of JFK, what innocent reason was there for them to destroy records?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Don, Here's some more:

Re: John Machado, the SS official who ordered the destruction of the records.

Machado is mentioned in ARRB files as having corresponded with the ARRB and delivering records to them.

He can't possibly be related to the Machado who ran Cuba before Batista, or Quentin Pio Machado, one of the Cubans who the SS investigated as part of a plot to kill JFK, former Castro diplomat?

Rowley was grilled about JFK Doc. F 414-418. Has anyone see these docs?

More to come on this guy.

Here's a legal court record of him on a sexual harrasment case:

Also See Gus Russo on Quentin Pino Machado :

(2) James J. Rowley, interviewed by Leodis Matthews for the

House Select Committee of Assassinations (19th September, 1978)

Leodis Matthews: At the time you made that assignment to Inspector Kelley, did you give him any specific instructions of what he should do when he reached Dallas?

James J. Rowley: I did not speak to him, but I am quite sure that Deputy Chief Paterni did. Paterni told him to take charge of the investigation, which was also my thought at the time we decided to send him there.

Leodis Matthews: Soon after Inspector Kelly arrived in Dallas and began his investigation, you received a communique through the mail, an office report, indicating that there had been a Chicago investigation of some Cubans?

James J. Rowley: I did not get that.

Leodis Matthews: Mr. Rowley, let me just call your attention to JFK F-419, a document I believe that I have supplied you earlier.

James J. Rowley: Yes.

Leodis Matthews: Have you had occasion to read through that report?

James J. Rowley: Yes, sir.

Leodis Matthews: That report indicates that you received it shortly after the assassination. It was entitled, "Possible Involvement by Quentin Pino Machado in a Conspiracy to Assassinate JFK." Did you review that report?

James J. Rowley: I do not think I reviewed that report. I did not see my initials on it, so therefore I have to assume I did not review it.

Leodis Matthews: I also call your attention to JFK F-422, a document which you also have in your possession, entitled, "Chicago Investigation of Cuban Groups Alleged To Be Involved in the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy." Do you have any recollection of having received and reviewed that report?

James J. Rowley: I think my initials are on that report which would indicate that I did read it, but I have no immediate recollection.

Leodis Matthews: Did you receive any report about the agents' performance in Dallas?

James J. Rowley: We did receive reports from time to time on Dallas, but which specific report are you referring to?

Leodis Matthews: Well, did you receive a report indicating how the agents had performed at the time that the shooting episode occurred in Dealey Plaza?

James J. Rowley: The report indicated that they performed adequately under the circumstances. The action of Agent Clint Hill, that he was attempting to take some action, is indicative of the agent's response.

Leodis Matthews: Did you play any role in supervising the investigation itself?

James J. Rowley: No, sir.

Leodis Matthews: I want to call your attention to what has been marked as JFK F-423, "Secret Service Organizational Chart," off to your right. In your opinion, would the Service have been organized in substantially the same manner in November of 1963?

James J. Rowley: Yes.

Leodis Matthews: Would Mr. Kelley's position on the chart have indicated that he had authority in the field office to direct that the agents conduct whatever investigation he felt was necessary?

James J. Rowley: Yes, sir, he had that authority...

Leodis Matthews: When the Warren Commission was established, you selected Mr. Kelley to be the liaison person?

James J. Rowley: Yes, sir.

Leodis Matthews: Why did you make that selection?

James J. Rowley: Why? Because it was a natural selection, inasmuch as he was in Dallas to conduct the investigation, and would be familiar with what might be required by the Warren Commission, and therefore would be of great assistance to them.

Leodis Matthews: As Chief of the Secret Service, did you ever make any attempts to meet with the person in charge of the FBI and formulate a strategy for investigation?

James J. Rowley: I did meet with Mr. Hoover and, we reaffirmed the longstanding cooperative relationship between our two agencies.

Leodis Matthews: Did you have any input on a strategy of investigation for the Warren Commission?

James J. Rowley: I think we did prepare something for the Warren Commission. Specifically I do not recall, but I have in the back of my mind such a report.

Leodis Matthews: Mr. Kelley has already testified to some exhibits I would like to identify for the record which you have a copy of: of JFK F-414, of JFK F-415, of JFK F-416, JFK F-417, and JFK F-418, a series of reports which his testimony has indicated involved the Secret Service investigation of the Cuban plot to assassinate the President. Were you aware of those reports during the course of the Warren Commission investigation?

James J. Rowley: No, I have no recollection of them.

Leodis Matthews: Do you have any recollection of having reviewed those documents?

James J. Rowley: No, sir. You mean at that time, or recently?

Leodis Matthews: At the time that the documents were generated.

James J. Rowley: No.

Leodis Matthews: Did you work out any agreement as to which files would be supplied to the Warren Commission?

James J. Rowley: That was left up to Inspector Kelley, since he was the one most familiar with what documents. In fact, he was directed to comply with all the requests that were made by the Commission to the Secret Service for reports...

Harold E. Ford: You mentioned a minute ago to the counsel that you met with the Director, Mr. Hoover, and in talking with him, did you ever discuss the line of investigation and the exchange of intelligence?

James J. Rowley: That was worked out right after the assassination, Mr. Congressman, but we already had their cooperation to the extent that they were able to provide us with intelligence information prior to that time.

Harold E. Ford: You mentioned earlier that you assigned Inspector Thomas Kelley.

James J. Rowley:Yes, sir.

Harold E. Ford: To Dallas for the investigation. Again for the record, why did you assign Mr. Kelley, dispatch him to the Dallas-Fort Worth area?

James J. Rowley: I assigned Mr. Kelley because he was the nearest inspector to Dallas at that time. As I explained previously since time was of the essence, I wanted to send an inspector as quickly as possible, and Mr. Kelly was the closest one. One of the responsibilities of an inspector is to do precisely what Mr. Kelly did in Dallas, direct the investigation and the activities.

Harold E. Ford: Was he there to investigate who may have been involved in the assassination or to review the performance of the Secret Service in connection with the assassination?

James J. Rowley: He was there to become involved in the investigation to determine the facts surrounding the assassination.

Harold E. Ford: Mr. Rowley, you testified before the Warren Commission June 18 of 1964. At that time in your testimony you were asked by Senator Cooper the following questions, and I quote: "Do you have any information based upon any facts that you know based upon any information given to you by persons who claim to have personal knowledge that there were persons engaged in a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy." And your response was, "I have no such facts, sir." He then asked you the following additional question, and I quote:

"I address the same question as to whether you have any information that the killing of President Kennedy had any connection with any foreign power." Your response was, and I quote: "I have no such information."

We have heard testimony from Mr. Kelley indicating that there were assassination plots investigated by the Secret Service in early 1963. Were you aware of those investigations at the time of your testimony before the Warren Commission?

James J. Rowley: I would have to look at the reports themselves, Mr. Congressman, to see whether my initials were on them. In the reports that you speak of, it was established that there was not any activity directed against--or of interest to us as it affected the President of the United States.

Harold E. Ford: Going back to the first question, you said, "I have no such facts, sir." " The second question you also said, I have no such information." I am asking now, were you aware of those investigations at the time you appeared before the Warren Commission?

James J. Rowley: Well, if I made that statement, then I was not aware of those facts.

Harold E. Ford: I would like counsel to give the witness JFK F-416, F417, F-418, and ask the witness whether his initials appear upon the face of these reports.

James J. Rowley: Yes, sir.

Harold E. Ford: Chief Rowley, why did you not call it to the Warren Commission's attention back in 1964 when you appeared before the Commission?

Chief Rowley. This information at the time was handled either by the PRS or through Mr. Kelley, and I can only assume, Mr. Congressman, that these reports were furnished to the Warren Commission.

Harold E. Ford: The reports in your hand were reported?

James J. Rowley: That is right. It was an ongoing investigation, as I see it, in which case there would be a relationship with the FBI and the CIA, and in the ultimate I would think that the report itself would establish whether or not it affected the safety of the President of the United States.

Harold E. Ford: But you had initialed these reports or documents prior to the June 18, 1964 appearance before the Warren Commission; is that correct?

James J. Rowley: That is correct, sir.

Edited by William Kelly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know what the F-414-418 docs are? Echivera? And since Rowley is No. 1 in SS and he didn't see them, then what about our friend #2, which reminds me of what #1 SPECTRE does to those who fail, fry them. #1 Rowley here is on the hot seat and the Warren lawyers want to know about these docs that refer to a SS investigation of a Cuba plot in Chicago, that #2 Paul Paterni was investigating.

So our new friend John Machado orders the SS records destroyed that include the records of the Chicago plot that was previously investigated by our other new friend, #2 Paul Paterni in the SS.

Hey Don, Here's some more:

Re: John Machado, the SS official who ordered the destruction of the records.

Machado is mentioned in ARRB files as having corresponded with the ARRB and delivering records to them.

He can't possibly be related to the Machado who ran Cuba before Batista, or Quentin Pio Machado, one of the Cubans who the SS investigated as part of a plot to kill JFK, former Castro diplomat?

Rowley was grilled about JFK Doc. F 414-418. Has anyone see these docs?

More to come on this guy.

Here's a legal court record of him on a sexual harrasment case:

Also See Gus Russo on Quentin Pino Machado :

(2) James J. Rowley, interviewed by Leodis Matthews for the

House Select Committee of Assassinations (19th September, 1978)

Leodis Matthews: At the time you made that assignment to Inspector Kelley, did you give him any specific instructions of what he should do when he reached Dallas?

James J. Rowley: I did not speak to him, but I am quite sure that Deputy Chief Paterni did. Paterni told him to take charge of the investigation, which was also my thought at the time we decided to send him there.

Leodis Matthews: Soon after Inspector Kelly arrived in Dallas and began his investigation, you received a communique through the mail, an office report, indicating that there had been a Chicago investigation of some Cubans?

James J. Rowley: I did not get that.

Leodis Matthews: Mr. Rowley, let me just call your attention to JFK F-419, a document I believe that I have supplied you earlier.

James J. Rowley: Yes.

Leodis Matthews: Have you had occasion to read through that report?

James J. Rowley: Yes, sir.

Leodis Matthews: That report indicates that you received it shortly after the assassination. It was entitled, "Possible Involvement by Quentin Pino Machado in a Conspiracy to Assassinate JFK." Did you review that report?

James J. Rowley: I do not think I reviewed that report. I did not see my initials on it, so therefore I have to assume I did not review it.

Leodis Matthews: I also call your attention to JFK F-422, a document which you also have in your possession, entitled, "Chicago Investigation of Cuban Groups Alleged To Be Involved in the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy." Do you have any recollection of having received and reviewed that report?

James J. Rowley: I think my initials are on that report which would indicate that I did read it, but I have no immediate recollection.

Leodis Matthews: Did you receive any report about the agents' performance in Dallas?

James J. Rowley: We did receive reports from time to time on Dallas, but which specific report are you referring to?

Leodis Matthews: Well, did you receive a report indicating how the agents had performed at the time that the shooting episode occurred in Dealey Plaza?

James J. Rowley: The report indicated that they performed adequately under the circumstances. The action of Agent Clint Hill, that he was attempting to take some action, is indicative of the agent's response.

Leodis Matthews: Did you play any role in supervising the investigation itself?

James J. Rowley: No, sir.

Leodis Matthews: I want to call your attention to what has been marked as JFK F-423, "Secret Service Organizational Chart," off to your right. In your opinion, would the Service have been organized in substantially the same manner in November of 1963?

James J. Rowley: Yes.

Leodis Matthews: Would Mr. Kelley's position on the chart have indicated that he had authority in the field office to direct that the agents conduct whatever investigation he felt was necessary?

James J. Rowley: Yes, sir, he had that authority...

Leodis Matthews: When the Warren Commission was established, you selected Mr. Kelley to be the liaison person?

James J. Rowley: Yes, sir.

Leodis Matthews: Why did you make that selection?

James J. Rowley: Why? Because it was a natural selection, inasmuch as he was in Dallas to conduct the investigation, and would be familiar with what might be required by the Warren Commission, and therefore would be of great assistance to them.

Leodis Matthews: As Chief of the Secret Service, did you ever make any attempts to meet with the person in charge of the FBI and formulate a strategy for investigation?

James J. Rowley: I did meet with Mr. Hoover and, we reaffirmed the longstanding cooperative relationship between our two agencies.

Leodis Matthews: Did you have any input on a strategy of investigation for the Warren Commission?

James J. Rowley: I think we did prepare something for the Warren Commission. Specifically I do not recall, but I have in the back of my mind such a report.

Leodis Matthews: Mr. Kelley has already testified to some exhibits I would like to identify for the record which you have a copy of: of JFK F-414, of JFK F-415, of JFK F-416, JFK F-417, and JFK F-418, a series of reports which his testimony has indicated involved the Secret Service investigation of the Cuban plot to assassinate the President. Were you aware of those reports during the course of the Warren Commission investigation?

James J. Rowley: No, I have no recollection of them.

Leodis Matthews: Do you have any recollection of having reviewed those documents?

James J. Rowley: No, sir. You mean at that time, or recently?

Leodis Matthews: At the time that the documents were generated.

James J. Rowley: No.

Leodis Matthews: Did you work out any agreement as to which files would be supplied to the Warren Commission?

James J. Rowley: That was left up to Inspector Kelley, since he was the one most familiar with what documents. In fact, he was directed to comply with all the requests that were made by the Commission to the Secret Service for reports...

Harold E. Ford: You mentioned a minute ago to the counsel that you met with the Director, Mr. Hoover, and in talking with him, did you ever discuss the line of investigation and the exchange of intelligence?

James J. Rowley: That was worked out right after the assassination, Mr. Congressman, but we already had their cooperation to the extent that they were able to provide us with intelligence information prior to that time.

Harold E. Ford: You mentioned earlier that you assigned Inspector Thomas Kelley.

James J. Rowley:Yes, sir.

Harold E. Ford: To Dallas for the investigation. Again for the record, why did you assign Mr. Kelley, dispatch him to the Dallas-Fort Worth area?

James J. Rowley: I assigned Mr. Kelley because he was the nearest inspector to Dallas at that time. As I explained previously since time was of the essence, I wanted to send an inspector as quickly as possible, and Mr. Kelly was the closest one. One of the responsibilities of an inspector is to do precisely what Mr. Kelly did in Dallas, direct the investigation and the activities.

Harold E. Ford: Was he there to investigate who may have been involved in the assassination or to review the performance of the Secret Service in connection with the assassination?

James J. Rowley: He was there to become involved in the investigation to determine the facts surrounding the assassination.

Harold E. Ford: Mr. Rowley, you testified before the Warren Commission June 18 of 1964. At that time in your testimony you were asked by Senator Cooper the following questions, and I quote: "Do you have any information based upon any facts that you know based upon any information given to you by persons who claim to have personal knowledge that there were persons engaged in a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy." And your response was, "I have no such facts, sir." He then asked you the following additional question, and I quote:

"I address the same question as to whether you have any information that the killing of President Kennedy had any connection with any foreign power." Your response was, and I quote: "I have no such information."

We have heard testimony from Mr. Kelley indicating that there were assassination plots investigated by the Secret Service in early 1963. Were you aware of those investigations at the time of your testimony before the Warren Commission?

James J. Rowley: I would have to look at the reports themselves, Mr. Congressman, to see whether my initials were on them. In the reports that you speak of, it was established that there was not any activity directed against--or of interest to us as it affected the President of the United States.

Harold E. Ford: Going back to the first question, you said, "I have no such facts, sir." " The second question you also said, I have no such information." I am asking now, were you aware of those investigations at the time you appeared before the Warren Commission?

James J. Rowley: Well, if I made that statement, then I was not aware of those facts.

Harold E. Ford: I would like counsel to give the witness JFK F-416, F417, F-418, and ask the witness whether his initials appear upon the face of these reports.

James J. Rowley: Yes, sir.

Harold E. Ford: Chief Rowley, why did you not call it to the Warren Commission's attention back in 1964 when you appeared before the Commission?

Chief Rowley. This information at the time was handled either by the PRS or through Mr. Kelley, and I can only assume, Mr. Congressman, that these reports were furnished to the Warren Commission.

Harold E. Ford: The reports in your hand were reported?

James J. Rowley: That is right. It was an ongoing investigation, as I see it, in which case there would be a relationship with the FBI and the CIA, and in the ultimate I would think that the report itself would establish whether or not it affected the safety of the President of the United States.

Harold E. Ford: But you had initialed these reports or documents prior to the June 18, 1964 appearance before the Warren Commission; is that correct?

James J. Rowley: That is correct, sir.

Edited by William Kelly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now