Felipe Vidal Santiago

[Shanet Clark]

Larry

That's about what my thoughts on Walker were, when I asked about the photo of the car on the other Thread. Thanks, to Tosh for volunteering the Siewell information. Georgia has the best polished granite quarries in the US, so a GA tombstone company is suppporting detail. Great thread.

Shanet in Atlanta.

[James Richards]

Just thought I would throw this document into the mix. FWIW.

Klihr not being cooperative at all.

Also Larry, I may be wrong here but I was under the impression that the photo was damaged while in the hands of the DPD.

James

Edited October 22, 2004 by James Richards

[Larry Hancock]

Good one James, I do recall that now - although it's hard to tell who was being less cooperative, always good to see the FBI being consistent.

Interesting that Klier was apparently not interviewed - which means perhaps nobody really wanted to follow up on his car being there? That sort of leaves both my suggested options open - a) complicity in the shooting hoax and not wanting to be associated with Walker.

And yes, I assume the photo was tampered with while in DPD custody and before it went into the WC files....although I am unclear as to the time frame for that it does not seem like it was done too quickly.

We know Walker had supporters on the force, they might not have known a report had been submitted to the WC or that the FBI had investigated but Walker or perhaps even Klier might have wanted the solid evidence showing him at Walkers house at a particular time to not be so solid.

-- Larry

[Shanet Clark]

Way to go Roy, should have known you would turn it up.

As far as James question goes though,  to really evaluate it requires a

concrete time line.  Could someone give us the date in which

the photo was taken (was it after or before the Walker shooting

attack...before I think?).   Obviously it did not have the liscence tag

scrapped off until in the first few days after the assassination as somebody

had to have time to take the number down and then do the investigation.

Any clue on when it got tampered with? 

Certainly it seems pretty stupid to intentionally tamper with evidence after

it has already served its purpose?  Or is it just possible that Mr. Klihr could

have been involved in the bogus attack on Walker.  possibly at Walker's

behest.  We know that later on the DPD evolved their Oswald shot at Walker

scenario to help make the picture of Oswald as a mad rifleman stick;  perhaps

at that time they might have regretted having anything in hand that could

have pointed in some other direction...raw speculation of course.

And of does anybody have more detail on Mr. Klihr and his the nature

of his association with Walker.....is there any chance we have a public

morals issue here rather than conspiracy?   As I recall DPD did arrest

Walker at some later date on a morals charge...I had a DPD Reserve

intel officer go over the details of that,  just can't remember the date.

-- a very interesting topic for sure,  Larry

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Larry

Why would you post a McAdams website?

Gary Mack helped you?

Gary Mack sent me a hysterical e-mail at home

with "That bridge was damned crowded and the Secret Service let it happen"

as the SUBJECT line.....and he claimed everybody on the bridge was railroad workers and the 1963 secret service couldn't do anything about it...

I don't appreciate that....I deleted it as Spam...

next time i won't even read it first,,,,,,,,,,,

If Gary Mack wants to talk to me do it over the Forum, not on my private email...

I believe Tosh...the eradicated license plate would show that Walker was with

was CAPTAIN SIEWELL from MILITARY INTELLIGENCE stationed at

Dallas Love Field..........

Shanet

Edited October 24, 2004 by Shanet Clark

[Ron Ecker]

Why would you post a McAdams website?

There is good information on the McAdams site. You just have to separate the wheat from the chaff.

If Gary Mack wants to talk to me do it over the Forum, not on my private email...

Gary Mack is one of the most valuable information resources around. You may not agree with something he says, but I can't imagine not wanting to hear from him. Send it to me, Gary!

[Shanet Clark]

I may not know everybody's reputation,

but that email was uncool.

shanet

[Tim Carroll]

I may not know everybody's reputation,

but that email was uncool.

shanet

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Shanet:

How about posting it? Gary seems to feel that it would be inappropriate for him to post to a forum, and I believe that is understandable given his position at the museum. He's a nice, helpful guy. Give him a call at the museum sometime on his dime (1-800) and you'll see. People have become frustrated with him over the years. He was an early and eager proponent of the Badgeman photogrammerty, and now he sometimes comes off like a Lone Nutter. Again, I attribute that to his position, which I believe requires the goodwill of the Dallas civic leaders.

Tim

[Shanet Clark]

I may not know everybody's reputation,

but that email was uncool.

shanet

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Shanet:

How about posting it? Gary seems to feel that it would be inappropriate for him to post to a forum, and I believe that is understandable given his position at the museum. He's a nice, helpful guy. Give him a call at the museum sometime on his dime (1-800) and you'll see. People have become frustrated with him over the years. He was an early and eager proponent of the Badgeman photogrammerty, and now he sometimes comes off like a Lone Nutter. Again, I attribute that to his position, which I believe requires the goodwill of the Dallas civic leaders.

Tim

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Okay it wasn't that big a deal

But when I get an email with "Damned...Secret Service" in bold

type, it is unnerving. Like i say, i deleted it, but he just gave the

warren commission line that all the people on the underpass

were RR workers and the RR was private property, so the

1963 Secret Service couldn't tell them to leave. Which is lame.

He's at the Dallas museum, huh?

Like I say I don't know all the researchers, just what I've picked up

over the years........Hell, I think the movie Executive Action is important!

If Gary felt that was the best way to reach me and feels he can't post,

and you say he's okay, thats the end of it....moving on...

Shanet

[Tim Carroll]

Shanet,

I loved the movie Executive Action. Burt Lancaster made a great Rip Robertson figure. That moment when one of the shooters says something about the Bay of Pigs and he gets that dental drill on a raw nerve reaction is great. In one moment, ole' Burt goes from cheery and business-like to steely anger. It gets pretty mixed reviews these days on the forums.

Gary Mack is the curator of the Sixth Floor Museum. It does seem strange that he would step in with that assertion, about which I agree with you. The idea that law enforcement couldn't clear an overpass is completely ridiculous. And we know it wasn't cleared.

Tim

Edited October 24, 2004 by Tim Carroll

[Ron Ecker]

Gary Mack sent me a hysterical e-mail at home

with "That bridge was damned crowded and the Secret Service let it happen"

as the SUBJECT line.....and he claimed everybody on the bridge was railroad workers and the 1963 secret service couldn't do anything about it...

I don't appreciate that....I deleted it as Spam...

This is from Gary Mack on the bridge question:

"I never knew, and I don't think any books mention it, that the Triple Underpass is private property owned by several railroads. That information surfaced a few years ago while working on a Sixth Floor Museum project.That, plus information from other documentation which I do not recall, explains what happened. In 1963, the Secret Service and Dallas Police had no jurisdiction over private property and people who had a legal right to be on it.According to DPD reports and WC testimony, the DPD called nearby Union Terminal (headquarters for railroad operations in the area) to send someone over to ID the workers who had a lawful right to be there. They sent S.M. Holland to do just that."

On the subject line Gary used in emailing you, I believe he was simply quoting you, as a reference point to the post he was responding to. I don't see nothing wrong with that. But I realize you've already addressed the matter of your reaction before knowing much about him.

[Shanet Clark]

Gary Mack sent me a hysterical e-mail at home

with "That bridge was damned crowded and the Secret Service let it happen"

as the SUBJECT line.....and he claimed everybody on the bridge was railroad workers and the 1963 secret service couldn't do anything about it...

I don't appreciate that....I deleted it as Spam...

This is from Gary Mack on the bridge question:

"I never knew, and I don't think any books mention it, that the Triple Underpass is private property owned by several railroads. That information surfaced a few years ago while working on a Sixth Floor Museum project.That, plus information from other documentation which I do not recall, explains what happened. In 1963, the Secret Service and Dallas Police had no jurisdiction over private property and people who had a legal right to be on it.According to DPD reports and WC testimony, the DPD called nearby Union Terminal (headquarters for railroad operations in the area) to send someone over to ID the workers who had a lawful right to be there. They sent S.M. Holland to do just that."

On the subject line Gary used in emailing you, I believe he was simply quoting you, as a reference point to the post he was responding to. I don't see nothing wrong with that. But I realize you've already addressed the matter of your reaction before knowing much about him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

RON

I know plenty about him...

See the administrators comments

Its serious.

Why are you defending this guy?

That email might reasonably have scared the hell out of somebody else.

Yes he was quoting me, OUTSIDE OF THIS FORUM ---

I don't know him, he was angry, and there was no,

"hey I'm emailing you outside of the forum, is that okay?"

just a big blast of defensive petulant Warren Commission nonsense.

with a subject line that could easily be seen as provocative

(provocateur?)

The people were on the bridge

over the President's head

as he got his brains blown out...

thats my point, SHANET

Edited October 24, 2004 by Shanet Clark

[Tim Carroll]

The people were on the bridge

over the President's head

as he got his brains blown out...

thats my point,  SHANET

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And a good point it is! There is no property right for RR employees, some of whom, given their Dallas residency in those days, would likely be virulently anti-JFK. It's absurd. It's not only about protection from assassination. The president is also to be protected from thrown objects, spitting (as happened the month earlier to Adlai Stevenson), or any other demonstrably hostile act.

Tim

Edited October 24, 2004 by Tim Carroll

[Ron Ecker]

Why are you defending this guy?

That email might reasonably have scared the hell out of somebody else.

I have passed along the info he gave me on this subject for the benefit of the forum, since you brought it up.

If his email scared you, that's between you and Gary. But don't forget, it's almost Halloween. I do find it odd that a JFK researcher had never heard of Gary Mack, since he goes back quite a ways.

Ron

[Shanet Clark]

Members,

I am not a JFK assassination researcher.

I am an interested historian who has read

widely in American political history and

intelligence history issues.

I am participating in an open forum by asking questions and

evaluating the evidence I see presented.

The entire concept of a sixth floor museum at the

Texas Book store depository is flawed.

It pushes, from its very premise,

that Oswald did it and you're standing right where "it' happened.

Why not a grassy knoll / underpass museum?

What was this thread about anyway?

See what they've done.

Distract, intimidate and marginalize.

ITS THE UNSPEAKABLE TRUTH OF TWENTIETH CENTURY POLITICAL HISTORY-

JOHN KENNEDY WAS MURDERED BY HIS MILITANT REACTIONARY OPPOSITION.

and their shills are still out there

shanet

[Tim Carroll]

Members, I am not a JFK assassination researcher.

I am an interested historian who has read

widely in American political history and

intelligence history issues.

shanet

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Shanet,

No need to be defensive about Ron's comment. Not everyone is as singularly obsessed with this particular history. Yesterday I was chastised for having forgotten General Walker's stop in Mississippi on the way to the nuthouse. Some of the minutae is so arcane and sometimes misleading. It's the function of the historian to boil an event down to it's coherent and provable essentials. Granted, this subject requires immersion in the details to a degree that automatically qualifies anyone who bothers as a conspiracy nut. And it is the massive amount of information and disinformation that keeps society distracted and/or disinterested. As Allen Dulles said, to paraphrase, maybe a few professors will read all the volumes of the WC, but generally, nobody will read it. Certainly it is difficult to focus on just this one subject sufficiently to be fluid with every detail. People who are that focused have generally had to trade off the attention they might have given to educate themselves about historical context. There is no reason that a historian would necessarily know anything about Gary Mack. I remember him from some old videos and have called him personally. But I enjoy your point: almost by definition, the sixth floor museum is devoted to the assumption of a sixth floor assassin. I appreciate Ron's significant contributions to forums, but I didn't appreciate his swipe about you not being familiar with Gary Mack. As I previously noted, as nice a guy as he seems, Gary owes his day job to the city of Dallas. He is not at the cutting edge of research, let alone history.

Tim