Tim Gratz Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 I found the photo of RFK with Humphrey in New York in October of 1964 very interesting. Even after Dallas! Of course, presumably no one shoots vice-presidential and senatorial candidates, but even still. I have to comment--just felt led to it here--isn't it a shame that people will resort to violence to further their political objectives? A sad commentary on the human species! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 (edited) Greg wrote: 3) The Secret Service made other last minute changes to the motorcade at Love Field, reducing the DPD motorcycles from 6 down to 2 and relegating them to positions behind the limo as opposed to in front of it. This opened up Kennedy to fields of fire from behind AND in front. Typically, GG 300 was flanked by 3 to 4 motorcycles on each side in such a procession. But, despite the high risk nature of the Dallas trip based on the higher than usual number of threats to Kennedy's life in the preceding weeks, the Secret Service acted to all but eliminate this element of the security profile. Now that my friend, is "ludicrous." Greg, I think if you check the Corbis photos you will also find that the statement that the presidential convertible limousine was normally flanked by motorcycles on each side is just as incorrect as the statement about the running boards! Someone is giving you false information. Perhaps that person has a "secret agenda"? We have to look at the evidence. The evidence of any security stripping in Dallas is nil. Thanks. Edited February 18, 2005 by Tim Gratz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Wagner Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 To Greg:I searched Corbis for Kennedy in Ireland and found a photo of the Kennedy motorcade in Cork Ireland. In that motorcade there were security agents standing on the driver's side of the convertible but none on Kennedy's side and he is standing, shaking hands of crowds that are standing literally a foot away from the convertible. Anyone could have popped him with a pistol! So I am curious: where did you get the information (so obviously false) about running boards on his trips to Berlin, Hawaii, etc? Some one, for some reason, seems to be giving you false information. Thanks to Corbis I can easily prove that part of your post is in plain error. Can you disclose the source of your statement re the running boards? I am curious about it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I just mentioned it above: Vince Palamara. While you attempt to explain the other quite numerous ways in which the Secret Service failed to protect Kennedy on 11/22/63, I will attempt to further vet the running board issue. Keep in mind that they were retractable, and perhaps not in use for the entire length of each trip. Obviously speed would be a factor as would proximity of the spectators- narrower quarters and close crowds also posing problems for their use. But you raise a valid concern regarding these snapshots of particular moments in time when they were not employed. As I stated above, I'll revisit the running board topic. Believe me, I'm not beyond admitting if I'm wrong (although I don't think I am). I'll continue to research this issue and advise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Wagner Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 I found the photo of RFK with Humphrey in New York in October of 1964 very interesting. Even after Dallas!Of course, presumably no one shoots vice-presidential and senatorial candidates, but even still. I have to comment--just felt led to it here--isn't it a shame that people will resort to violence to further their political objectives? A sad commentary on the human species! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Particularly so in a country where we'd like to think our democracy had evolved beyond that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 (edited) Greg wrote: As I stated above, I'll revisit the running board topic. Believe me, I'm not beyond admitting if I'm wrong (although I don't think I am). I'll continue to research this issue and advise. Greg, I am sure that you are not above admitting you are wrong, and that says a lot about you. Around the first of the year I showed John (and he posted) an interesting article about Albert Einstein that made the point that even Einstein, who everyone would agree is one of the smartest men who ever lived, had to admit when he discovered that he had been in error. So that is as sign of both intellectual integrity and intelligence! But I respectfully suggest you spend some time looking at the Kennedy photos on the corbis web-site and you will find that several of the statements you posted were in error. Not your fault. You were just reciting information you received from someone else--who should have known better! Take away the issue of security stripping and one of the few props to support the idea of an "internal coup" collapses. I will admit, however, that there could have been an internal coup without security stripping. It's just that that false issue is one of the very few possible indicias of an internal coup. Take it away and what are you left with re the internal coup idea? Not much! Edited February 18, 2005 by Tim Gratz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Richards Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 What's happening over there on the other side of the world these days? (Greg Wagner) It's summer here at the moment, Greg. For me that means drinking lots of beer and ogling the tanned beauties strolling around the Gold Coast wearing nothing but a thong and a smile. Point taken. Even if the letter came out and contained legit info, the other side would undoubtedly launch a campaign to muddy the waters. And at the end of the day we'd all be debating it's authenticity, accuracy, credibility, true meaning, etc. I would be interested in talking to that attorney though. My take on the Corsican teams/mechanics is largely speculation. A theory that seems to make sense to me, but one that I haven't investigated beyond a cursory glance. Certainly could be another attempt in the long line of misdirection plays as you rightly suggest. But I'm going to it alive (in my twisted mind) on the back burner until I can take a closer look at the tactical piece. Not really my forte, but certainly essential to understanding what happened on 11/22/63. (Greg Wagner) I agree. I believe there are complexities here that may never be fully understood. I have heard possibilities discussed like another hit team being positioned near the Trade Mart in case Dealey Plaza had to be aborted. If they were going to hit JFK in L. A. or Chicago, would the same shooters be employed? If Vaughn Marlowe was the designated patsy for Los Angeles, could multiple hit teams and other patsies been on call? Was a contingent of Corsicans ready to go at another location? Fascinating possibilities. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Wagner Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 What's happening over there on the other side of the world these days? (Greg Wagner)It's summer here at the moment, Greg. For me that means drinking lots of beer and ogling the tanned beauties strolling around the Gold Coast wearing nothing but a thong and a smile. Point taken. Even if the letter came out and contained legit info, the other side would undoubtedly launch a campaign to muddy the waters. And at the end of the day we'd all be debating it's authenticity, accuracy, credibility, true meaning, etc. I would be interested in talking to that attorney though. My take on the Corsican teams/mechanics is largely speculation. A theory that seems to make sense to me, but one that I haven't investigated beyond a cursory glance. Certainly could be another attempt in the long line of misdirection plays as you rightly suggest. But I'm going to it alive (in my twisted mind) on the back burner until I can take a closer look at the tactical piece. Not really my forte, but certainly essential to understanding what happened on 11/22/63. (Greg Wagner) I agree. I believe there are complexities here that may never be fully understood. I have heard possibilities discussed like another hit team being positioned near the Trade Mart in case Dealey Plaza had to be aborted. If they were going to hit JFK in L. A. or Chicago, would the same shooters be employed? If Vaughn Marlowe was the designated patsy for Los Angeles, could multiple hit teams and other patsies been on call? Was a contingent of Corsicans ready to go at another location? Fascinating possibilities. James <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It's summer here at the moment, Greg. For me that means drinking lots of beer and ogling the tanned beauties strolling around the Gold Coast wearing nothing but a thong and a smile. NICE! I agree. I believe there are complexities here that may never be fully understood. I have heard possibilities discussed like another hit team being positioned near the Trade Mart in case Dealey Plaza had to be aborted. If they were going to hit JFK in L. A. or Chicago, would the same shooters be employed? If Vaughn Marlowe was the designated patsy for Los Angeles, could multiple hit teams and other patsies been on call? Was a contingent of Corsicans ready to go at another location? Fascinating possibilities. Sure is fun trying though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Wagner Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 (edited) Greg wrote:As I stated above, I'll revisit the running board topic. Believe me, I'm not beyond admitting if I'm wrong (although I don't think I am). I'll continue to research this issue and advise. Greg, I am sure that you are not above admitting you are wrong, and that says a lot about you. Around the first of the year I showed John (and he posted) an interesting article about Albert Einstein that made the point that even Einstein, who everyone would agree is one of the smartest men who ever lived, had to admit when he discovered that he had been in error. So that is as sign of both intellectual integrity and intelligence! But I respectfully suggest you spend some time looking at the Kennedy photos on the corbis web-site and you will find that several of the statements you posted were in error. Not your fault. You were just reciting information you received from someone else--who should have known better! Take away the issue of security stripping and one of the few props to support the idea of an "internal coup" collapses. I will admit, however, that there could have been an internal coup without security stripping. It's just that that false issue is one of the very few possible indicias of an internal coup. Take it away and what are you left with re the internal coup idea? Not much! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thanks for the kind words Tim. Although we obviously do not agree on some basic issues, I find your passion and ability to "do battle" quite formidable. But then, you are a Badger, are you not? Quite a town, Madison. Been there for a few Buckeye/Badger tilts and would expect nothing less from a Mad City boy! I have located several corroborating photos on the Corbis site myself in virtually no time (what a cool site that is!). Of course they won't upload. However, I will be happy to email them to anyone who requests them of me. Just send me an email and I'll send you the photos listed below. In closing (I really should be asleep by now, but you got me too fired-up with all your "you are wrong" posts!), I must mention that I did view the pics you found as well. And they appeared as you stated. But as I perhaps failed to post in a clear fashion above, I am not suggesting that there were never times when certain of the aforementioned protection devices were not employed. In fact there were circumstances in which their deployment would not have been practical at all. But that certainly was not the case in Dallas. The Corbis photos below clearly illustrate just as several Secret Service agents have explicitly stated to Mr. Palamara, in several other instances prior to 11/22/63, Kennedy was protected to a much greater degree than he was in Dallas. This includes the running boards and the motorcycles as I have described them. Finally, I believe it would be a mistake to consider only the "running board" issue and the "motorcycle" issue when deciding whether or not the Secret Service is guilty as I (and many others, including their own agents) have charged them. I am not here to convince anyone. Look at the evidence and highly suggestive material and decide for yourself. Like I said, I certainly could be wrong, but I don't think that I am in this particular instance. Please check out the photos below. If you'd like me to send you copies, just email me. Corbis IH038944 - JFK motorcade in Italy, clearly showing agents on the running boards on both sides of the presidential limo. It's the second car back in the photo. You'll also notice that, unlike Dallas, there is a Secret Service car out front with an agent standing up looking back. Corbis U1384904 - JFK motorcade in Berlin. No running boards here, but quite unnecessary when you look at the WALL of motorcycle escorts flanking the limo. There are also two agents on or in (hard to tell which) the rear of the limo with Kennedy- even with this WALL of motorcycle escorts flanking. Corbis U1385223 - JFK motorcade in Cork, Ireland. Motorcycles flanking each side of the limo (appears to be two on each side, which takes up most or all of the length of the limo). Note that they are not sitting back off of the rear of the car as they were instructed to do in Dallas. And we have agents standing all over the darned car: on the running boards on both sides and at least one at the rear platform (can't see the other one clearly). Again, do we see this type of security profile in a known hostile city (to JFK at that time) like Dallas? Uh... nope. Corbis U1385578 - Another shot of JFK's motorcade in Italy - Hard to tell, but looks like running boards are absent. However, crowds nowhere near the limo. And I count 19, yes 19, motorcycle escorts directly flanking both sides, in front of and in the rear of Kennedy's limo. That score again, Italy 19, Dallas 2. One thing to remember here: what we are talking about is Kennedy's security/protection profile during other motorcades as compared to Dallas. Based on the concern over the Dallas trip and the threats on Kennedy's life, the profile should have been much stronger than it was. In fact, we see that is was actually much weaker than the protection Kennedy received in the photos I've listed. Does this mean that there were never points in time or circumstances along a route that made such a profile impracticle? No. In fact I would suggest that that is precisely why the side steps/running boards were retractable. But DP was neither fast, congested nor friendly. And in my opinion, Kennedy was not protected at all. Just take a look at those photos in comparison to Dallas. To me, the differences are compelling. Are there any good photos showing what exactly (cars, motorcycles, etc.) was in front of GG 300 as it passed through DP? My impression has always been that Kennedy's was the first limo in the procession, and that there was not much in the way of security out front. Though I have not been able to locate a good photo that would reveal this. I eagerly await your next salvo. Well, maybe not “eagerly.” Edited February 18, 2005 by Greg Wagner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Greg, read your most recent post with great interest. Glad you've been to my home town, Mad-Town. Now you've got to visit Key West which has the (dubious?) distinction of being even madder than Madison. But my lifestyle is as conservative as my politics. I moved here for the weathher (best in the continental U.S., IMO). Corbis is a great site. You can learn a lot just by looking at the photos and the captions. It is at Corbis that I first learned that Santo Trafficante was a leading suspect in the notorious "barbershop murder" of New York mafioso Albert Anastasia, who was apparently trying to get himself a cut of the action in Cuba. Two gangsters came into a fancy Manhattan barbershop and blasted Anastasia right out of the barber chair as he was about to get a shave. In any event, I'll get around to replying to your post tonight. Get some sleep, buddy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Wagner Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 (edited) Greg, read your most recent post with great interest.Glad you've been to my home town, Mad-Town. Now you've got to visit Key West which has the (dubious?) distinction of being even madder than Madison. But my lifestyle is as conservative as my politics. I moved here for the weathher (best in the continental U.S., IMO). Corbis is a great site. You can learn a lot just by looking at the photos and the captions. It is at Corbis that I first learned that Santo Trafficante was a leading suspect in the notorious "barbershop murder" of New York mafioso Albert Anastasia, who was apparently trying to get himself a cut of the action in Cuba. Two gangsters came into a fancy Manhattan barbershop and blasted Anastasia right out of the barber chair as he was about to get a shave. In any event, I'll get around to replying to your post tonight. Get some sleep, buddy! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Was that the photo of the body on the floor wrapped in bloody sheets? I remember seeing that as a little kid. I remember being scared to get my haircut after that. My aunt lived in Key West. I was there once as a youngster, but don't remember much. Other than that "Southernmost Point" place and some cool snorkeling. I'm out. I'll try and check in tomorrow or soon. Get some sleep yourself! Later Tim Edited February 18, 2005 by Greg Wagner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Didn't think you were that old. I was relatively young when it happened. You are correct about the Anastasia murder. There is a good picture of what you recall on the corbis web-site. FYI, the famous Appalachin crime conference occured only a few weeks after the Anastasia murder. Giancana escaped through the woods and was never captured. Santo was arrested but released and he then fled the US for Cuba. In January of 1959 the Cuban police questioned Trafficante about both the Appalachin crime conference and the Anastasia murder. The Cuban police's report to the NY police is on Gordon Winslow's web-site. It was the Appalachin crime conference that first introduced the American public to organized crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Wagner Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 (edited) Didn't think you were that old. I was relatively young when it happened.You are correct about the Anastasia murder. There is a good picture of what you recall on the corbis web-site. FYI, the famous Appalachin crime conference occured only a few weeks after the Anastasia murder. Giancana escaped through the woods and was never captured. Santo was arrested but released and he then fled the US for Cuba. In January of 1959 the Cuban police questioned Trafficante about both the Appalachin crime conference and the Anastasia murder. The Cuban police's report to the NY police is on Gordon Winslow's web-site. It was the Appalachin crime conference that first introduced the American public to organized crime. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Holy catfish! I just went to Corbis as you mentioned to look up the photo, and the murder occurred 10 years to the day prior to when I was born (October 25th). I'm sure I must have just seen a historical photo in some book. Freaky. Interesting history on the conference, Sam and Santo(s). Is it "Santo" or "Santos"? I've seen it written both ways in publications and on this board. Are they both correct? Edited February 18, 2005 by Greg Wagner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Richards Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Is it "Santo" or "Santos"? I've seen it written both ways in publications and on this board. Are they both correct? (Greg Wagner) Hi Greg, It is Santo. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Wagner Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Is it "Santo" or "Santos"? I've seen it written both ways in publications and on this board. Are they both correct? (Greg Wagner)Hi Greg, It is Santo. James <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I learn something new everyday. Thanks JR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanet Clark Posted February 19, 2005 Author Share Posted February 19, 2005 (edited) Albert Spaggiari, Author of Fric Frac, The Great Riviera Bank Robbery. Former OAS mercenary and paratrooper in Laos in the early 1960's. Claimed to have had George DeGaulle "in his sights" but didn't pull the trigger. Edited February 19, 2005 by Shanet Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now