Jump to content
The Education Forum

Vince Palamara


Recommended Posts

The destruction of a target -- human or otherwise -- protected by a relatively competent, large (and therefore impossible to corrupt en masse) professional security force is wholly dependent for success upon the stripping of that force.

Security stripping phenomena in Dallas (JFK) and Memphis (MLK) have been documented by Vince Palamara and Philip Melanson, respectively. As for RFK, security was virtually non-existant.

Regardless of what you may know/believe/assume about the destructions of the WTC buildings, the Pentagon, and Diana, security was stripped from those usually well protected targets immediately prior to their respective demises.

What, if anything, does this tell us about the nature of these events?

Charles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The destruction of a target -- human or otherwise -- protected by a relatively competent, large (and therefore impossible to corrupt en masse) professional security force is wholly dependent for success upon the stripping of that force.

Security stripping phenomena in Dallas (JFK) and Memphis (MLK) have been documented by Vince Palamara and Philip Melanson, respectively. As for RFK, security was virtually non-existant.

Regardless of what you may know/believe/assume about the destructions of the WTC buildings, the Pentagon, and Diana, security was stripped from those usually well protected targets immediately prior to their respective demises.

What, if anything, does this tell us about the nature of these events?

Charles

I love the way you think and write, Charles. Whenever I think of clear, articulate speaking, Robert DeNiro [your idol as mentioned at Fredonia], or jazz music, I think of you LOL

Thanks...and I think you are right (of course). One thing it DOES tell us---regardless of your 'theory' (official government stance or otherwise), if proper security and advance work (like heeding warnings and threats) would have been done, these tragedies would have been prevented.

vince palamara

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rybka died 12/25/75 of a heart attack. Debra Conway alleged (via e-mail), seemingly offhand years ago, that Rybka's family contacted her but, when I asked her for details, I never recieved them. The WC, the HSCA, and everyone else didn't even mention the Rybka/ Roberts incident until I first brought it up in 1994 (at COPA in 1995)--as former agent Larry Newman told me, "I had never seen that before" and didn't have any explanation for it.

See my online book for more details re: this and the dead agent 'stories'. The 'stories' may be ultimately untrue, but they provided a cover story for the Secret Service to take the President's body under their control, etc.

vince;)

Vince and forum readers:

On 18 Nov 2001, I received an email from the granddaughter of SA Henry J. Rybka asking for information, photos, etc. as they were trying to put together items on his career as a Secret Service Agent. She didn't say, but I assume she read Vince's article on our website as she refers to it and the short film. I put together a package for the family that included Vince's article and the best copy I had of the film from Love Field.

During this time I was working with Vince on a book project and did mention to him the Rybka contact. Unfortunately, the project between Vince and JFK Lancer was terminated by JFK Lancer on December 2, 2002 and it was my decision at that time not to give the Rybka contact information to Vince but to another researcher.

In December 2005, I again heard from the granddaughter. She had been told about a better quality of the film clip being available on DVD. I checked this out for her and found it is "JFK: Breaking The News." I ordered a copy from the Sixth Floor Museum and sent it to her.

The family has no knowledge of the assassination from Rybka. That's why they wrote to me.

Sincerely,

Debra Conway

PS: Vince and I now communicate regularly and there are no hard feelings that I am aware of. I wish him the best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rybka died 12/25/75 of a heart attack. Debra Conway alleged (via e-mail), seemingly offhand years ago, that Rybka's family contacted her but, when I asked her for details, I never recieved them. The WC, the HSCA, and everyone else didn't even mention the Rybka/ Roberts incident until I first brought it up in 1994 (at COPA in 1995)--as former agent Larry Newman told me, "I had never seen that before" and didn't have any explanation for it.

See my online book for more details re: this and the dead agent 'stories'. The 'stories' may be ultimately untrue, but they provided a cover story for the Secret Service to take the President's body under their control, etc.

vince;)

Vince and forum readers:

On 18 Nov 2001, I received an email from the granddaughter of SA Henry J. Rybka asking for information, photos, etc. as they were trying to put together items on his career as a Secret Service Agent. She didn't say, but I assume she read Vince's article on our website as she refers to it and the short film. I put together a package for the family that included Vince's article and the best copy I had of the film from Love Field.

During this time I was working with Vince on a book project and did mention to him the Rybka contact. Unfortunately, the project between Vince and JFK Lancer was terminated by JFK Lancer on December 2, 2002 and it was my decision at that time not to give the Rybka contact information to Vince but to another researcher.

In December 2005, I again heard from the granddaughter. She had been told about a better quality of the film clip being available on DVD. I checked this out for her and found it is "JFK: Breaking The News." I ordered a copy from the Sixth Floor Museum and sent it to her.

The family has no knowledge of the assassination from Rybka. That's why they wrote to me.

Sincerely,

Debra Conway

PS: Vince and I now communicate regularly and there are no hard feelings that I am aware of. I wish him the best.

No hard feelings at all; very true.:)

I thought maybe it turned out it wasn't really Rybka's family after all (not your fault: thought maybe someone was pulling your leg on the other end lol)...glad to hear it was.

If you still have the contact info., let me know. If not, no biggie.

vince:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rybka died 12/25/75 of a heart attack. Debra Conway alleged (via e-mail), seemingly offhand years ago, that Rybka's family contacted her but, when I asked her for details, I never recieved them. The WC, the HSCA, and everyone else didn't even mention the Rybka/ Roberts incident until I first brought it up in 1994 (at COPA in 1995)--as former agent Larry Newman told me, "I had never seen that before" and didn't have any explanation for it.

See my online book for more details re: this and the dead agent 'stories'. The 'stories' may be ultimately untrue, but they provided a cover story for the Secret Service to take the President's body under their control, etc.

vince;)

Vince and forum readers:

On 18 Nov 2001, I received an email from the granddaughter of SA Henry J. Rybka asking for information, photos, etc. as they were trying to put together items on his career as a Secret Service Agent. She didn't say, but I assume she read Vince's article on our website as she refers to it and the short film. I put together a package for the family that included Vince's article and the best copy I had of the film from Love Field.

During this time I was working with Vince on a book project and did mention to him the Rybka contact. Unfortunately, the project between Vince and JFK Lancer was terminated by JFK Lancer on December 2, 2002 and it was my decision at that time not to give the Rybka contact information to Vince but to another researcher.

In December 2005, I again heard from the granddaughter. She had been told about a better quality of the film clip being available on DVD. I checked this out for her and found it is "JFK: Breaking The News." I ordered a copy from the Sixth Floor Museum and sent it to her.

The family has no knowledge of the assassination from Rybka. That's why they wrote to me.

Sincerely,

Debra Conway

PS: Vince and I now communicate regularly and there are no hard feelings that I am aware of. I wish him the best.

No hard feelings at all; very true.:)

I thought maybe it turned out it wasn't really Rybka's family after all (not your fault: thought maybe someone was pulling your leg on the other end lol)...glad to hear it was.

If you still have the contact info., let me know. If not, no biggie.

vince:)

P.S. There are high quality copies of the WFAA/ "Rybka" film (video) to be found on the DVD "JFK: The Day The Nation Cried", the old 1988 James Earl Jones JFK tribute, as well as (if you can find it) my episode of TMWKK

vince:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vince,

In a 5/27/98 post on alt.conspiracy.jfk, you commended author Richard Trask for his book “That Day in Dallas.” You referred to p. 34 of this book and said, "Agent Thomas “Lem” Johns is seen running toward the camera car. . ." (as captured in Tom Dillard's photo with a man in the street running alongside camera car #1). Unfortunately, you were wrong. It was not Johns but rather White House cameraman Tom Atkins.

Then five and a half years later in an 11/27/03 post on the same alt.conspiracy.jfk forum, you said Johns "was left behind VERY briefly on the ROAD and hitched a ride in one of the camera cars as verified by the film record" (emphasis yours). You never clarified at this later time just why you believed the film record verified this, so one can only assume that you were still under the mistaken impression that Atkins was Johns in the Dillard photo.

It's a little hard for me to believe that in five and a half years no one in the entire research community ever advised you -- or that you never found out in any other way -- that you were wrong back in 1998, i.e. that Lem Johns is not the man seen running alongside camera car #1 in Dillard's photo. But maybe no one did, and maybe you never became aware of any evidence that you were wrong.

The problem is, you've been on the record, and apparently still are, with incorrect information that has helped to unnecessarily quash an important area of research.

Here's the correct information. The film and photo record does NOT verify that Lem Johns hitched a ride out of Dealey Plaza in camera car #1 that day. That's not to say that he didn't. It's just that no photo or film frame taken that day captures him in that car from the time it approaches the grassy knoll until it is about to enter the triple underpass.

So. . . Have you, by any chance, cleared up all this confusion at any time since 11/27/03 and admitted that you were in error? If you have, and I've missed it, then my apologies. If not, then now is the time to set the record straight.

Do you agree that the film and photo record does NOT verify that Lem Johns left Dealey Plaza in camera car #1? Or are you still of the same opinion? If so, then why?

Thanks.

Ken

Hi Ken,

Yes, several (many? LOL) of my early online (newsgroup) errors have since been corrected via my online books and so forth (I always considered myself to be a 'work-in-progress'...aren't we all? lol). I SPOKE TO LEM JOHNS IN 2004: he told me adamantly that he was only on the road a mere few ***seconds***, time enough to catch his ride, never leaving the road...so much for those who think he was the agent of unknown repute. The allegation (that ***Johns*** was the mysterious agent by the knoll and so forth) has been quashed. Time to move on.

vince :)

Vince,

Thanks for the response. But you didn’t answer my question. Here it is once again.

**Do you agree that the film and photo record does NOT verify that Lem Johns left Dealey Plaza in camera car #1?**

I’m not saying that Lem wasn’t in the car. I’m merely referring to what the known photographic record shows. You said it verified that he was in the car. And you were mistaken. But so far no retraction that I can find.

Please answer the question. Then I can, as you say, move on.

Ken

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vince,

In a 5/27/98 post on alt.conspiracy.jfk, you commended author Richard Trask for his book “That Day in Dallas.” You referred to p. 34 of this book and said, "Agent Thomas “Lem” Johns is seen running toward the camera car. . ." (as captured in Tom Dillard's photo with a man in the street running alongside camera car #1). Unfortunately, you were wrong. It was not Johns but rather White House cameraman Tom Atkins.

Then five and a half years later in an 11/27/03 post on the same alt.conspiracy.jfk forum, you said Johns "was left behind VERY briefly on the ROAD and hitched a ride in one of the camera cars as verified by the film record" (emphasis yours). You never clarified at this later time just why you believed the film record verified this, so one can only assume that you were still under the mistaken impression that Atkins was Johns in the Dillard photo.

It's a little hard for me to believe that in five and a half years no one in the entire research community ever advised you -- or that you never found out in any other way -- that you were wrong back in 1998, i.e. that Lem Johns is not the man seen running alongside camera car #1 in Dillard's photo. But maybe no one did, and maybe you never became aware of any evidence that you were wrong.

The problem is, you've been on the record, and apparently still are, with incorrect information that has helped to unnecessarily quash an important area of research.

Here's the correct information. The film and photo record does NOT verify that Lem Johns hitched a ride out of Dealey Plaza in camera car #1 that day. That's not to say that he didn't. It's just that no photo or film frame taken that day captures him in that car from the time it approaches the grassy knoll until it is about to enter the triple underpass.

So. . . Have you, by any chance, cleared up all this confusion at any time since 11/27/03 and admitted that you were in error? If you have, and I've missed it, then my apologies. If not, then now is the time to set the record straight.

Do you agree that the film and photo record does NOT verify that Lem Johns left Dealey Plaza in camera car #1? Or are you still of the same opinion? If so, then why?

Thanks.

Ken

Hi Ken,

Yes, several (many? LOL) of my early online (newsgroup) errors have since been corrected via my online books and so forth (I always considered myself to be a 'work-in-progress'...aren't we all? lol). I SPOKE TO LEM JOHNS IN 2004: he told me adamantly that he was only on the road a mere few ***seconds***, time enough to catch his ride, never leaving the road...so much for those who think he was the agent of unknown repute. The allegation (that ***Johns*** was the mysterious agent by the knoll and so forth) has been quashed. Time to move on.

vince :)

Vince,

Thanks for the response. But you didn’t answer my question. Here it is once again.

**Do you agree that the film and photo record does NOT verify that Lem Johns left Dealey Plaza in camera car #1?**

I’m not saying that Lem wasn’t in the car. I’m merely referring to what the known photographic record shows. You said it verified that he was in the car. And you were mistaken. But so far no retraction that I can find.

Please answer the question. Then I can, as you say, move on.

Ken

I retract it (actually, I did years ago)!!!! This was based on information provided to me by others at the time.

**Do you agree that the film and photo record does NOT verify that Lem Johns left Dealey Plaza in camera car #1?**YES

vince

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vince, for numerous reasons, I'm convinced a clean-up of the limousine occurred outside Parkland. This may have been done for purely innocent reasons. Even so, the Secret Service's refusal to acknowledge this clean-up, innocent or not, is suspicious.

Did Kinney ever discuss this with you? Did any of the other agents?

My gut tells me one of the agents found CE399 in the limousine, and planted it on what they thought was Connally's stretcher, in order to hide that they'd screwed up and cleaned-up the crime scene. What are your thoughts on this issue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vince,

In a 5/27/98 post on alt.conspiracy.jfk, you commended author Richard Trask for his book “That Day in Dallas.” You referred to p. 34 of this book and said, "Agent Thomas “Lem” Johns is seen running toward the camera car. . ." (as captured in Tom Dillard's photo with a man in the street running alongside camera car #1). Unfortunately, you were wrong. It was not Johns but rather White House cameraman Tom Atkins.

Then five and a half years later in an 11/27/03 post on the same alt.conspiracy.jfk forum, you said Johns "was left behind VERY briefly on the ROAD and hitched a ride in one of the camera cars as verified by the film record" (emphasis yours). You never clarified at this later time just why you believed the film record verified this, so one can only assume that you were still under the mistaken impression that Atkins was Johns in the Dillard photo.

It's a little hard for me to believe that in five and a half years no one in the entire research community ever advised you -- or that you never found out in any other way -- that you were wrong back in 1998, i.e. that Lem Johns is not the man seen running alongside camera car #1 in Dillard's photo. But maybe no one did, and maybe you never became aware of any evidence that you were wrong.

The problem is, you've been on the record, and apparently still are, with incorrect information that has helped to unnecessarily quash an important area of research.

Here's the correct information. The film and photo record does NOT verify that Lem Johns hitched a ride out of Dealey Plaza in camera car #1 that day. That's not to say that he didn't. It's just that no photo or film frame taken that day captures him in that car from the time it approaches the grassy knoll until it is about to enter the triple underpass.

So. . . Have you, by any chance, cleared up all this confusion at any time since 11/27/03 and admitted that you were in error? If you have, and I've missed it, then my apologies. If not, then now is the time to set the record straight.

Do you agree that the film and photo record does NOT verify that Lem Johns left Dealey Plaza in camera car #1? Or are you still of the same opinion? If so, then why?

Thanks.

Ken

Hi Ken,

Yes, several (many? LOL) of my early online (newsgroup) errors have since been corrected via my online books and so forth (I always considered myself to be a 'work-in-progress'...aren't we all? lol). I SPOKE TO LEM JOHNS IN 2004: he told me adamantly that he was only on the road a mere few ***seconds***, time enough to catch his ride, never leaving the road...so much for those who think he was the agent of unknown repute. The allegation (that ***Johns*** was the mysterious agent by the knoll and so forth) has been quashed. Time to move on.

vince :)

Vince,

Thanks for the response. But you didn’t answer my question. Here it is once again.

**Do you agree that the film and photo record does NOT verify that Lem Johns left Dealey Plaza in camera car #1?**

I’m not saying that Lem wasn’t in the car. I’m merely referring to what the known photographic record shows. You said it verified that he was in the car. And you were mistaken. But so far no retraction that I can find.

Please answer the question. Then I can, as you say, move on.

Ken

I retract it (actually, I did years ago)!!!! This was based on information provided to me by others at the time.

**Do you agree that the film and photo record does NOT verify that Lem Johns left Dealey Plaza in camera car #1?**YES

vince

Thanks, Vince.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vince, for numerous reasons, I'm convinced a clean-up of the limousine occurred outside Parkland. This may have been done for purely innocent reasons. Even so, the Secret Service's refusal to acknowledge this clean-up, innocent or not, is suspicious.

Did Kinney ever discuss this with you? Did any of the other agents?

My gut tells me one of the agents found CE399 in the limousine, and planted it on what they thought was Connally's stretcher, in order to hide that they'd screwed up and cleaned-up the crime scene. What are your thoughts on this issue?

I agree--the limousine was cleaned up at Parkland and at the White House garage. Kinney and George Hickey helped in the cleanup. I don't think Kinney viewed this as suspicious.

Re: CE399---see my book:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v4n1.html

chapter 8, page 11

vince palamara

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vince, As an active researcher it would be illogical for me to read Bugliosi's tome, [i believe reading books by Posner, Fuhrman et al takes an astounding amount of time. and if I ever wrote material on the assassination, it surely would not be in the nature of a p - - - - - - contest, with the aforementioned] I will save that very important job, [no sarcasm intended] to those who have the expertise to do so.....

But.....taking a look at the big picture, The Achilles Heel in any "Oswald did it" scenario, is that nobody can place Lee Oswald on the sixth floor when the shots were fired; Howard Brennan was eventually exposed as not being able to factually ID Ozzie as he described the all too important "sequence of events", and there is also the inconvenient truth that even if he had been, he [Oswald] would have had to pass Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles going down the stairs, in the very critical "sequence of events" in the immediate seconds after the shots were fired.

If that can't be established beyond a shadow of a doubt, the whole packaged story is built on quicksand, is it not? Unless of course, Oswald was beamed down before Baker and Truly saw him.

Posner and Fuhrman make the alleged FACT that Oswald was indeed at the window, the very warp and woof of their hack job's.

So, no doubt Bugliosi did too, isn't that, what's the word I'm looking for a WEAKNESS.. in the 3 tome's of their respective Verdict's of History..?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vince, for numerous reasons, I'm convinced a clean-up of the limousine occurred outside Parkland. This may have been done for purely innocent reasons. Even so, the Secret Service's refusal to acknowledge this clean-up, innocent or not, is suspicious.

Did Kinney ever discuss this with you? Did any of the other agents?

My gut tells me one of the agents found CE399 in the limousine, and planted it on what they thought was Connally's stretcher, in order to hide that they'd screwed up and cleaned-up the crime scene. What are your thoughts on this issue?

I agree--the limousine was cleaned up at Parkland and at the White House garage. Kinney and George Hickey helped in the cleanup. I don't think Kinney viewed this as suspicious.

Re: CE399---see my book:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v4n1.html

chapter 8, page 11

vince palamara

Thanks, Vince, I read most of your book, but stupidly skipped Greer. I incorrectly assumed you spent the chapter discussing the theory that he'd pulled the trigger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Where'd Vince go?

I hope Vince is busy somewhere enjoying life. He has devoted so many of his best years to researching the secret service. I think any questions members may have for Vince are answered in his book to the best of his ability.

I think Vince is unique among assassination authors in making his book freely available online. That might be a good definition of a Noble Man.

Of course I cannot say I agree with everything Vince has said in book reviews on Amazon, but I love him like a brother nonetheless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...