New book will posit Oswald acted alone AND JFK had it coming

[Don Jeffries]

Yes, they did all they could do, but there was an advantage to the (lone nut) shooter. Clint Hill cetainly sounds like a real hero to me. It's astounding that he has been able to fully recover from what we were told were tremendous feelings of guilt. He ought to feel guilty- he and the other agents were guilty of a complete dereliction of duty. And no, running belatedly to the limo, after the damage is done, after refusing to react to the first sound of gunfire, doesn't qualify Hill as being competent, let alone heroic.

The mainstream media press release message for Blaine's book echoes the kind of disinformation we heard from them back in the early '90s, after the article by the autopsy doctors in JAMA magazine. The surgeons had spoken on the record numerous times before, but the public was told that they were "breaking their silence" to tell the truth at last. As Vince Palamara points out in another thread on the subject, the Secret Service agents spoke publicly many times, including all the interviews he conducted himself. There is nothing "exclusive" at all about this, except that it reeks of deception and dishonesty.

It was inexcusable enough that the Secret Service agents failed completely to live up to their responsibilities in Dallas on November 22, 1963. To add insult to injury, a surviving agent now seeks to profit financially from his failure, which directly resulted in the death of President Kennedy.

[Harvey Brammer]

The agents who were drinking that night in Fort Worth should have been disciplined and or terminated

from their positions.It is inexcusable that they were not.When dealing with the protection

of the President,nothing less should have been acceptable.

[William Kelly]

So what does it all mean?

Did JFK call the agents "Ivy League Charlitans,"?

And if so, what does that mean?

And did he use it in the context of staying off the rear of the car?

In the book The Kennedy Detail, Blaine recount almost shooting LBJ for wandering into his post outside the Elms residence, and then being called into the chief's office, thinking it was about that incident.

When in fact, he was questioned not about the Elms, or about Texas but about the Forida trip in which the President was being quoted as calling the agents "Ivy League Charlaitans" and asking they not stay on the back of the car.

If this is so, what does it really mean?

Thanks,

BK

[Bernice Moore]

Hi Bill; imo I'ts another alibi another excuse, to blame the victim,many other excuses have been set forth and many more will follow, but one by one they are being found and disposed of,here is another disposed of, imo, on page 27 of the book, they are in New York for the evening, in the past in many threads there has been many a post made about how the SS Queen Mary could not manouveur quickly to help in anyway, as there was only 5 feet distance between her and the XP 100, and also that perhaps Greer was in shock , not trained. slow to react or whatever else could be used, to extricate him, but now, i quote Blaine, ''Art Godfrey in the lead car and ATSAIC Emory Roberts in the Secret Service follow-up car received the transmission, and the three cars began moving out at a uniform pace. The object was for the driver of the President's car to remain between five and ten feet behind the lead car --just close enough to impede another car from coming between them, but far enough away if he needed to make a fast break. he could step on the gas and swerve left or right .The Secret Service follow up car was to remain a consistant five feet behind the President's car, no matter what, Maintaining this formation in traffic was sort of like flying a Blue Angels maneuver.''.end quote; .WHICH MEANS To ME THAT BLAINE'S INFORMATION IS STATING THAT GREER AS WELL AS ALL DRIVERS OF THE 100 WAS TRAINED TO PULL OUT IMMEDIATELY AT THE FIRST SIGN OF TROUBLE,THOUGH NOT FROM ANOTHER CAR THIS TIME IN DALLAS, BUT FROM RIFLE FIRE, BUT DID NOT, but imo the first time it has been admitted...in a book.. yes it is the why i buy these books, to look for the truth that contradicts whomever's previous alibis and excuses, and finally admits, what was really known all along.thanks b