What happened in Dallas

[Al Carrier]

Very interesting. It's either the biggest stuff-up in USSS history or it was planned as a one way trip. It raises some interesting questions.

Three that pop immediately to mind are:

1) How did Oswald stage-manage all of this?

2) Could there

possibly

have been a conspiracy?

3) Can Al Carrier

really

"defend" this all away?

Stay tuned ...! Somehow I suspect it will all get much more interesting ....

Duke and all,

What you must understand is that the Presidential vehicle is responsible for the pace of the motorcade. The lead car sets the speed by distancing itself consistently from the presidential vehicle. If the pace through DP was too slow, which obvisously it was, then it is the not the fault of the lead car which housed Chief Curry and Sheriff Decker, but the driver of the limo and the lead agent, Agents Greer and Kellerman, respectfully. I am not saying that they were the groundwork for the assassination and they would have been fools to be considering the shots from various angles from rifles into the limo which would have subjected them to being hit. It was the planning of the exposure of the motorcade that allowed the assassination to happen. It is obvious.

Why was there insufficient numbers of DPD throughout Dealey Plaza? Because once they made their turn onto Elm, the crowds were significantly minimal and closed off, so the need for ground security was mininal if not all together not needed. The concern for the ground security planning was intersection blockage and crowd control. Once they passed Houston, they had kept the majority of the crowd off and would not need on ground security. Do not look at this in hindisight, but instead consider what they feared after the Stevenson incident and the history of incidents that plagued these type of visits.

Again, I ask for specific issues of concerns and I will address them from the standpoint of '63.

Al

[Thomas Graves]

Why was there insufficient numbers of DPD throughout Dealey Plaza? Because once they made their turn onto Elm, the crowds were significantly minimal and closed off, so the need for ground security was mininal if not all together not needed. The concern for the ground security planning was intersection blockage and crowd control. Once they passed Houston, they had kept the majority of the crowd off and would not need on ground security.

____________________________________________

Al,

As regards the planning, or lack thereof, by the Secret Service and/or the Dallas Police Department for DEALY PLAZA and its immediate surroundings for 11/22/63, IMHO they should have realized that the motorcade's route would necessitate the 20'-long limo's making a virtual (Reinhard Heydrich-like) "hairpin turn" at the corner of Houston and Elm and that Greer's negotiating said turn would prevent him from accelerating to a normal speed down Elm Street until he had "straightened out" the limo and gotten it back in its proper position in the middle of the street (doing so, of course, without subjecting the Kennedys and the Connelys to too many "G's" and/or too much centrifugal force -- afterall, Kennedy did have a bad back, and regardless, I suppose that maintaining a proper level of decorum was important in any normal situation). The SS and the DPD were also (presumably) aware of the tall buildings, the concrete structures (pergolas. etc) the grassy knoll, the trees, the wooden fence atop the grassy knoll, the parking lot behind the wooden fence, the triple overpass, etc, all being in general proximity to that "hairpin turn."

The Dallas Police Department, especially, should have anticipated the crowds' thinning out after the turn at Houston and Elm (as indeed it did thin out). Given this and the above-mentioned factors, the DPD should have known that that stretch of the route would be one of the more dangerous sections. Why? Unobstructed "lines of sight" for any potential shooter(s) in this section! Also, any potential shooter(s) would probably feel more free to operate here due to a lower probability of an onlooker's spotting him/them and yelling out something like "Hey, there's a guy with a gun over there!!! Duck!!!!" IMHO, therefore, the DPD should at least have posted some officers behind of/in front of the wooden fence and should have positioned more officers on the triple overpass, all with "handhelds" (and those on the overpass with "glasses," too, if feasible).

What do you think, Al?

FWIW, Thomas

_____________________________________________

Edited December 12, 2005 by Thomas Graves

[Ron Ecker]

I would like to add that something mysterious happened with the two DPD officers who were stationed on the underpass. The one who was on the west side of the underpass testified that he saw and heard nothing during the shooting because a long noisy freight train was passing, blocking his view to the east. The other officer mentioned no train in his testimony, but later backed up the other officer by telling researcher Larry Sneed that not a lot could be seen or heard from the underpass because "boxcars were going by at the time the motorcade passed through."

No one else in Dealey Plaza that I know of saw or heard any train going by at the time of the shooting, nor does it make sense that the officer on the east side of the underpass was unable to see a lot because of the passing phantom train, since the train was behind him.

When this was discussed earlier on this forum, Al suggested that the officers may have told of an obstructive train in order to cover up their having concentrated on what was happening in the limo instead of trying to determine the source of the shots as they should have. But that is pure speculation on Al’s part as to what the officers concentrated on.

What seems to me more likely, by way of speculation, is that the officer on the west side, being in a position to see both eastern ends of the underpass (for example, the area around the storm drain behind the north knoll fence, and the area at the opposite end where the east banister slants away toward the south knoll parking lot), saw something during the shooting that perhaps he should not have seen. The idea of a passing train became convenient to prevent him from seeing what he saw (because of threats, fear, or for whatever reason).

Does anyone have a better speculative explanation for this story of a long and noisy freight train going by while the shots were being fired?

[Mark Stapleton]

Very interesting. It's either the biggest stuff-up in USSS history or it was planned as a one way trip. It raises some interesting questions.

Three that pop immediately to mind are:

1) How did Oswald stage-manage all of this?

2) Could there

possibly

have been a conspiracy?

3) Can Al Carrier

really

"defend" this all away?

Stay tuned ...! Somehow I suspect it will all get much more interesting ....

Hazarding a guess, my answers are he must have been a genius, yes and I doubt it.

The question of the motorcycle flanking units is an interesting one. Vince Palamara states that, according to the DPD, this was a last minute change which resulted from a November 21 meeting via David Grant (Vince Palamara's words). The decision to downsize the number of flanking units from 18 to 4 was unique to Dallas. 18 units were used in Fort Worth earlier that day.

Strange things were happening which were unique to Dallas. Second and third stringers were being put in charge (in some cases for the first time). Palamara's analysis of the SS White House Detail reveals that SAIC Jerry Behn took his first holiday in three years leaving ASAIC Floyd Boring in charge--but he organised the trip from Washington, leaving third stringer Roy Kellerman in charge in Dallas (his first time in charge). Kellerman's order to driver Bill Greer was disobeyed and his authority at DP and Parkland was usurped by a subordinate, Emory Roberts. Roberts was later promoted to be Official Records Secretary to LBJ (whatever that is). Roberts had also ordered Agent Rybka from the back of the Presidential limo at Love Field and also ordered the agents not to move seconds before the fatal headshot.

Press Secretary Pierre Salinger, well versed in motorcade security arrangements, was on a plane to Japan. Assistant Press Secretary Malcolm Kilduff, a third stringer and relatively inexperienced, was on his own for the first time.

Boring's advance man, David Grant, arrived from Miami on November 18 and, according to Palamara, had a major influence in security arrangements including the motorcade route and motorcycle escorts. The more high profile partner from the advance party, Win Lawson and Agent Forrest Sorrels had driven the route--the one which went straight down Main Street-- on November 14 but we all know it was subsequently changed prior to November 22. Boring was later promoted to Inspector.

Niether Boring, Roberts nor Grant were interviewed by the WC, HSCA or the FBI.

Remember Al, the HSCA didn't judge that security arrangements for Dallas were insecure. They judged that security arrangements for Dallas were "uniquely insecure".

Edited December 12, 2005 by Mark Stapleton

[Al Carrier]

Very interesting. It's either the biggest stuff-up in USSS history or it was planned as a one way trip. It raises some interesting questions.

Three that pop immediately to mind are:

1) How did Oswald stage-manage all of this?

2) Could there

possibly

have been a conspiracy?

3) Can Al Carrier

really

"defend" this all away?

Stay tuned ...! Somehow I suspect it will all get much more interesting ....

Hazarding a guess, my answers are he must have been a genius, yes and I doubt it.

The question of the motorcycle flanking units is an interesting one. Vince Palamara states that, according to the DPD, this was a last minute change which resulted from a November 21 meeting via David Grant (Vince Palamara's words). The decision to downsize the number of flanking units from 18 to 4 was unique to Dallas. 18 units were used in Fort Worth earlier that day.

Strange things were happening which were unique to Dallas. Second and third stringers were being put in charge (in some cases for the first time). Palamara's analysis of the SS White House Detail reveals that SAIC Jerry Behn took his first holiday in three years leaving ASAIC Floyd Boring in charge--but he organised the trip from Washington, leaving third stringer Roy Kellerman in charge in Dallas (his first time in charge). Kellerman's order to driver Bill Greer was disobeyed and his authority at DP and Parkland was usurped by a subordinate, Emory Roberts. Roberts was later promoted to be Official Records Secretary to LBJ (whatever that is). Roberts had also ordered Agent Rybka from the back of the Presidential limo at Love Field and also ordered the agents not to move seconds before the fatal headshot.

Press Secretary Pierre Salinger, well versed in motorcade security arrangements, was on a plane to Japan. Assistant Press Secretary Malcolm Kilduff, a third stringer and relatively inexperienced, was on his own for the first time.

Boring's advance man, David Grant, arrived from Miami on November 18 and, according to Palamara, had a major influence in security arrangements including the motorcade route and motorcycle escorts. The more high profile partner from the advance party, Win Lawson and Agent Forrest Sorrels had driven the route--the one which went straight down Main Street-- on November 14 but we all know it was subsequently changed prior to November 22. Boring was later promoted to Inspector.

Niether Boring, Roberts nor Grant were interviewed by the WC, HSCA or the FBI.

Remember Al, the HSCA didn't judge that security arrangements for Dallas were insecure. They judged that security arrangements for Dallas were "uniquely insecure".

You are all looking at this after-the-fact in terms of presidential security. You are focusing on a scoped rifle attack on the president and picking apart Dealy Plaza and ignoring the prior route on Main that was just as accessible to a rifle threat and even the Tampa Visit the previous week where the only variation was the use of the flying wedge with the motorcycle escort that was not present in Dallas. (I refer to my DP Echo Article of March of 2002). Even with that, the elevation of the shooters would not have been effected by the motorcycle escorts if they would have been present as they were in Tampa and Berlin.

The sharp turn from Houston to Elm was covered as far as normal security was considered as there were ample uniformed officers in the vacinity and the follow-up USSS car was in close proximity to challenge any groung attacks. The shooter(s) did not fire when the limo made the slow turn.

Dealy Plaza was an ideal kill zone if one was looking for a military sniper hit. Nobody was in November of '63. If they were, then the route would have been changed and the speed of the limo would have been altered from the time it left Love Field. There are no inconsistencies in DP from the previous security on the motorcade route. This tells us what they were concerned about and how they got caught with their pants down. It does not show complicentcy with the assassination.

Once the limo entered DP, they could have added twenty more motorcycles and an additional fifty officers on the ground, the hit would still have went off if that was what they wanted. Trust me, it was not that difficult under the circumstances. The most difficult part was fleeing the scene undetected.

Al

[Tim Carroll]

Dealy Plaza was an ideal kill zone if one was looking for a military sniper hit. Nobody was in November of '63.

I thought that a military-type sniper hit was on most people's minds in November 1963. There were the OAS plots against deGaulle (Day of the Jackal scenario), and Kennedy himself had described precisely this type of assassination that very morning in Forth Worth.

T.C.

[Al Carrier]

Dealy Plaza was an ideal kill zone if one was looking for a military sniper hit. Nobody was in November of '63.

I thought that a military-type sniper hit was on most people's minds in November 1963. There were the OAS plots against deGaulle (Day of the Jackal scenario), and Kennedy himself had described precisely this type of assassination that very morning in Forth Worth.

T.C.

Tim,

Again you are looking at it in hindsight and puting history into perspective with real time of November of '63. Did any of the previous USSS protection details consider such a hit? If you look at them they did not or they would not have utilized an open limo. Kennedy referred to a nut with a rifle, not a professional military hit team. To this day, if professionals are called in and deployed at lets say an airfield or at a speaking engagement arrival, the chance of succeeding in a hit is pretty high.

Al

[Tim Carroll]

Dealy Plaza was an ideal kill zone if one was looking for a military sniper hit. Nobody was in November of '63.

I thought that a military-type sniper hit was on most people's minds in November 1963.... Kennedy himself had described precisely this type of assassination that very morning in Forth Worth.

Again you are looking at it in hindsight and puting history into perspective with real time of November of '63.... Kennedy referred to a nut with a rifle, not a professional military hit team.

Wasn't JFK himself aware of the increased emphasis on military sniper training as part of the expansion of the use of special forces for counterinsurgency and so-called brushfire conflicts? When I referred to "military-type" sniper hit I was deliberately distinguishing that from straight "military" snipers, such as that which Al considers to have been at work in Dealey Plaza.

For me to understand that distinction better, a historic example of a "military sniper hit" would be helpful. I know that MLK was hit by a sniper, but not much more than that. What would be an example of a military hit, in Central America or anywhere else, that exhibited classic "military" procedure? It's certainly understandable if names can't be used. But a description of the circumstances that demonstrate it to be military in nature would be helpful.

It's absolutely true that this is a hindsight observation, but thinking about the advances being made during those years with military special forces training, and the innovated means to kill individuals with a minimum of international political accountability, it would be a classic, and ironic, interagency blunder if Presidential Protection wasn't advanced to correspondingly counter the very types of innovations being made in the arts of killing by the military.

T.C.

Edited December 12, 2005 by Tim Carroll

[Mark Stapleton]

Tim and Al,

You're getting sidetracked. It's not about whether or not it was a military hit or even if the SS expected that kind of hit.

It's about placing second and third stringers in Dallas that day, ordering Rybka off the limo, Greer stopping twice and looking back, changing the motorcade route, changing the normal motorcade order, ordering agents to hold back before the final shot, greatly reducing the number of flanking motorcycles and apparently having no protection plan for the return trip.

How many mistakes can professional agents make in a day?

Taken individually, these issues might appear to some as nit-picking, but when they're put together they amount to a substantial argument--whether you look at it from forty years ago or now.

Edited December 12, 2005 by Mark Stapleton

[Mark Knight]

I believe that the subhead on this topic is, "Was "security" adequate or not?"

Obviously, since the subject of the security measures was killed, it is OBVIOUS that the measures WERE NOT ADEQUATE to ensure the safety of the subject. If they HAD been adequate, the subject wouldn't have been killed. Now, if the question had been "Was "security" REASONABLE or not, in light of past practices?" then I believe Al has answered the question that, yes, it was.

But I, too, find it strange that, with all the assignments of the security detail being spelled out on the way TO the Trade Mart, NONE were spelled out concerning the return trip to Love Field. While it wasn't scheduled to be a parade, as the entrance to the Trade Mart was, surely there would've been SOME assigned security--with time of assignment "to be determined" by departure time from the Trade Mart. Sure, it's even reasonable to assume that the return trip would be made at higher speed and with little fanfare...but to have NO security assignments for the return trip, including security assignments at Love Field itself, seems a bit odd.

I realize that, forty-two years later, it's almost impossible to look at this through a 1963 prism. But while security procedures have tightened a lot since 1963, it is almost impossible to believe that the USSS and the DPD believed that the POTUS was 100% secure with NO security plan in place for the return trip to Love Field. Even under the standards affected at the time, I just cannot believe that the USSS was convinced that no one would ever attempt a hit on the Chief Executive as he was LEAVING town. While the timing of the departure run may not have been as predictable as the parade into town, the fact that there was a return trip planned to AF1, sooner or later, is a given [as the kids say these days, "Duh!"]. And to assume NO possibility existed for anyone to try to harm the President on his way out of town is an extremely naive assumption for ANY professional security outfit to make...IMHO.

[Guest John Gillespie]

"Harold Weisberg once said about his Whitewash works that "there are no

theories in my books... they're factual."[1] The sentiment about factuality

has been echoed by many respectable researchers, who insist that "the Kennedy

case ought to be treated as a homicide, which is what it is." Aren't we

pressing for a final, legal investigation of the JFK murder to view all of

the evidence, new and old, holding it to the constraints of our legal system?

A common refrain, after all, is that the Warren Commission's investigation

and "conviction" of Lee Oswald would never have held up in a true adversarial

judicial proceeding.

Interestingly, we don't seem to hold ourselves to the same constraints. If

one researcher discovers something, even in error, we are apparently

permitted to cite that person's work, without certification, as established

fact. Many people complain when their own theories are held up to the same

critical light as we hold the official investigations, as if we aren't

beholden to the same burden of proof we assign them."

...from 'THE COWTOWN CONNECTION' by M. Duke Lane

Thanks, Duke. Even the most earnest and well-intentioned among us occasionally put things in regression. I'm enjoying this debate and this new (for me) information.

Yours Truly,

JAG

[Duke Lane]

"Harold Weisberg once said about his Whitewash works that "there are no theories in my books... they're factual."[1] The sentiment about factuality has been echoed by many respectable researchers, who insist that "the Kennedy case ought to be treated as a homicide, which is what it is." Aren't we pressing for a final, legal investigation of the JFK murder to view all of the evidence, new and old, holding it to the constraints of our legal system? A common refrain, after all, is that the Warren Commission's investigation and "conviction" of Lee Oswald would never have held up in a true adversarial judicial proceeding.

Interestingly, we don't seem to hold ourselves to the same constraints. If one researcher discovers something, even in error, we are apparently permitted to cite that person's work, without certification, as established fact. Many people complain when their own theories are held up to the same critical light as we hold the official investigations, as if we aren't beholden to the same burden of proof we assign them."

...from 'THE COWTOWN CONNECTION' by M. Duke Lane

Thanks, Duke. Even the most earnest and well-intentioned among us occasionally put things in regression. I'm enjoying this debate and this new (for me) information.

Yours Truly,

JAG

Wow, how scary is that? I was reading the words and thinking to myself, "gee, that sounds like something I'd write!" Who'd have thought that it was?!?

[Gerry Hemming]

Dealy Plaza was an ideal kill zone if one was looking for a military sniper hit. Nobody was in November of '63.

I thought that a military-type sniper hit was on most people's minds in November 1963. There were the OAS plots against deGaulle (Day of the Jackal scenario), and Kennedy himself had described precisely this type of assassination that very morning in Forth Worth.

T.C.

Tim,

Again you are looking at it in hindsight and puting history into perspective with real time of November of '63. Did any of the previous USSS protection details consider such a hit? If you look at them they did not or they would not have utilized an open limo. Kennedy referred to a nut with a rifle, not a professional military hit team. To this day, if professionals are called in and deployed at lets say an airfield or at a speaking engagement arrival, the chance of succeeding in a hit is pretty high.

Al

-----------------------------------

Lt. Carrier KNOWS of what he speaks. He is NOT defending the USSS, DPD, DCSO, MI, US Army CIC, or the YMCA; nor anybody else who has been blatantly accused of complicity in the JFK "Hit" !!

The current campaign to have the Barrett .50 calibre "Long-Range Sniper Rifle" included in new rule-making

proceedings by the BATF component of the Dept. of Homeland Security speaks volumes.

[see: "The Federal Administrative Procedures Act" - annotated Rulemaking Cases, Administrative Law Reports & the C.F.R. - http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html (Code of Federal Regulations)]

The first Hollywood film that showed the unique effectiveness of the "Barrett" was: "Navy Seals", and starred Charlie Sheen, Biehn, et al. !! "60-Minutes" and some other programs have hysterically focused their "sights" against this weapon; as have some Democrat politicians and "Gun Control" activists.

One TV segment showed a politician standing near Pennsylvania and Constitution, and with the Capitol Building at his back, he expounded upon the reality that: A shooter could easily hit a target sited at either end or even the middle of said streets, and target that building or the White House !!

However, and whether it be a Barrett of 2005 -- or a "National Match" M-14 (NATO 7.62 mm) of 1963; there is absolutely NO defense against a "well-trained military sniper". The skills necessary for hide-site selection, angles of fire, lighting, windage, mirage, parallax, tracking, etc. are NOT those readily acquired by an amateur "Rifleman".

[Take note of exactly how many times a rifle has been used in ANY assassination (or attempt) in the history of the World ??!!]

The bald allegations and accusations of complicity by USSS or other law enforcement entities goes beyond the pale. That some "wing-nuts" have pointed the finger at Kellerman and Greer is scandalous, to say the least. That some "Puke" scribbled a worthless & gossipy "book?" -- about the accidental discharge of one SS agent's "M-16" (in a "tailback" vehicle); that having caused any of JFK's wounds is outrageous.

Too many "self-styled" researchers/investigators?? are nothing more than filthy rumor-mongers; who have absolutely NO regard for the personal reputations or integrity of ANY alleged "suspects?" nor their families !!

[ALL that is required is: That "NEW" names surface concurrent with one newly emerging event of note; such as -- "Watergate", or the "Soviet Agitprop Christic RICO lawsuit", etc., and etc. -- ad nauseum !!]

That said, I would NOT be shocked to find that: There indeed were one or more persons, who, previously having been "highly placed" in government circles, opted (or was coerced) into giving an assist to the those shooters who participated in the "MULTIPLE" assassination schemes during that November of 1963.

Anyone who is de minimus conversant with tradecraft -- would have immediately noticed the "professional" skills exhibited with the selection of Dealey Plaza, the TSBD, and its environs. The same professional criteria is obvious with the selection of Oswald "safe-houses in the Dallas suburds. It is quite obvious that this was done "for" LHO, and NOT by Oswald.

Red Flags went up over 40+ years ago, when experts perused the very obvious "signatures" left by the Intel operator(s) selections: The necessities of a rear entrance or a side alley; a nearby park or semi-forested area; a nearby library (needed for "dead-drops"); that the front of the house is situated with an intersection wich precludes "spotter vehicles" from any casual/routine parking for stake-outs; etc., and etc. !!

As Lt. Carrier so "politely" attempts to tutor: NO assist by law enforcement (nor Intel) is necessary. What is necessary for targeting by a "skilled" rifleman? -- his "personal" plan.

The "Sponsor" provides ALL that which is needed in order to place the target within a prescribed "killing zone" !!

Once the target enters ANY of the previously selected "MULTIPLE KILLING ZONES/WINDOWS" -- THAT TARGET IS DEAD MEAT !!

ENOUGH of this hundreds of "suspects?"bullxxxx disinformation spiel, ranting ever onward with all of this crap about "faces-in-the-crowd", "traitors-from-within" !! Oliver Stone hired us to "Plan" the assassination of an executive target, and we crawled all over EVERY building in the area; showing Stone and his crew exactly what goes into the kill zone-selection, hide-site(s) selection, and "E & E" Plan.

Uppermost in the planning of "non-Kamikaze" assassins is: The 'E & E" Plan. "Escape and Evasion" seems to be a critical factor in one's surviving long enough to collect one's rewards.

LHO didn't "bring a knife to a gunfight" -- he didn't bring anything at all !! Had he wanted to commit "suicide-by-cop", he wouldn't have left his snub-nose revolver at home. I have strong doubts that he ever possessed any weapon whatsoever. And rarest of the rare -- he risks self-defeating the singular opportunity at "15 Centuries-of-Fame"; by DENYING THE WHOLE GODDAMN THING ??!!

That he would even contemplate the use of an "EYETIE" throw-down & surrender rifle, or a worthless piece of xxxx "2 inch barreled" revolver, especially when for & $7 more, he could have purchased a semi-auto pistol -- and one very similar to the Colt .45 cal. pistol we Marines are ALL trained with at 'Boot Camp" !!

Once again, we have that most unique of alleged "fanatical assassins". One who fails to make the "head-on" shot [because the "sniper's nest" is a wet-dream]; then carries the still loaded rifle all the way across the "6th Floor??", taking TIME to hide it, runs down the stairway (and now unarmed), calmly exits the TSBD from the FRONT door, catches a bus, and then a taxi -- back to his "safe-house". He then allegedly takes a circuitous/deviated/detour (walking?) route from there to the site of later arrest -- a "THEATER" !!

Will somebody please grow some brains, and get off of the current disinformation campaign, every skilled in this research recognizes it as a continuation of the very same scheme -- which began even LONG before JFK's arrival in Texas.

Chairs,

GPH

__________________________

[Lynne Foster]

"Harold Weisberg once said about his Whitewash works that "there are no

theories in my books... they're factual."[1] The sentiment about factuality

has been echoed by many respectable researchers, who insist that "the Kennedy

case ought to be treated as a homicide, which is what it is." Aren't we

pressing for a final, legal investigation of the JFK murder to view all of

the evidence, new and old, holding it to the constraints of our legal system?

A common refrain, after all, is that the Warren Commission's investigation

and "conviction" of Lee Oswald would never have held up in a true adversarial

judicial proceeding.

Interestingly, we don't seem to hold ourselves to the same constraints. If

one researcher discovers something, even in error, we are apparently

permitted to cite that person's work, without certification, as established

fact. Many people complain when their own theories are held up to the same

critical light as we hold the official investigations, as if we aren't

beholden to the same burden of proof we assign them."

...from 'THE COWTOWN CONNECTION' by M. Duke Lane

Thanks, Duke. Even the most earnest and well-intentioned among us occasionally put things in regression. I'm enjoying this debate and this new (for me) information.

Yours Truly,

JAG

Harold Weisberg is the best and he proved that both that both James Earl Ray and Oswald were framed, and this document essentially proves that J. Edgar Hoover framed Lee harvey Oswald.

[Mark Stapleton]

Dealy Plaza was an ideal kill zone if one was looking for a military sniper hit. Nobody was in November of '63.

I thought that a military-type sniper hit was on most people's minds in November 1963. There were the OAS plots against deGaulle (Day of the Jackal scenario), and Kennedy himself had described precisely this type of assassination that very morning in Forth Worth.

T.C.

Tim,

Again you are looking at it in hindsight and puting history into perspective with real time of November of '63. Did any of the previous USSS protection details consider such a hit? If you look at them they did not or they would not have utilized an open limo. Kennedy referred to a nut with a rifle, not a professional military hit team. To this day, if professionals are called in and deployed at lets say an airfield or at a speaking engagement arrival, the chance of succeeding in a hit is pretty high.

Al

-----------------------------------

Lt. Carrier KNOWS of what he speaks. He is NOT defending the USSS, DPD, DCSO, MI, US Army CIC, or the YMCA; nor anybody else who has been blatantly accused of complicity in the JFK "Hit" !!

The current campaign to have the Barrett .50 calibre "Long-Range Sniper Rifle" included in new rule-making

proceedings by the BATF component of the Dept. of Homeland Security speaks volumes.

[see: "The Federal Administrative Procedures Act" - annotated Rulemaking Cases, Administrative Law Reports & the C.F.R. - http://www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/index.html (Code of Federal Regulations)]

The first Hollywood film that showed the unique effectiveness of the "Barrett" was: "Navy Seals", and starred Charlie Sheen, Biehn, et al. !! "60-Minutes" and some other programs have hysterically focused their "sights" against this weapon; as have some Democrat politicians and "Gun Control" activists.

One TV segment showed a politician standing near Pennsylvania and Constitution, and with the Capitol Building at his back, he expounded upon the reality that: A shooter could easily hit a target sited at either end or even the middle of said streets, and target that building or the White House !!

However, and whether it be a Barrett of 2005 -- or a "National Match" M-14 (NATO 7.62 mm) of 1963; there is absolutely NO defense against a "well-trained military sniper". The skills necessary for hide-site selection, angles of fire, lighting, windage, mirage, parallax, tracking, etc. are NOT those readily acquired by an amateur "Rifleman".

[Take note of exactly how many times a rifle has been used in ANY assassination (or attempt) in the history of the World ??!!]

The bald allegations and accusations of complicity by USSS or other law enforcement entities goes beyond the pale. That some "wing-nuts" have pointed the finger at Kellerman and Greer is scandalous, to say the least. That some "Puke" scribbled a worthless & gossipy "book?" -- about the accidental discharge of one SS agent's "M-16" (in a "tailback" vehicle); that having caused any of JFK's wounds is outrageous.

Too many "self-styled" researchers/investigators?? are nothing more than filthy rumor-mongers; who have absolutely NO regard for the personal reputations or integrity of ANY alleged "suspects?" nor their families !!

[ALL that is required is: That "NEW" names surface concurrent with one newly emerging event of note; such as -- "Watergate", or the "Soviet Agitprop Christic RICO lawsuit", etc., and etc. -- ad nauseum !!]

That said, I would NOT be shocked to find that: There indeed were one or more persons, who, previously having been "highly placed" in government circles, opted (or was coerced) into giving an assist to the those shooters who participated in the "MULTIPLE" assassination schemes during that November of 1963.

Anyone who is de minimus conversant with tradecraft -- would have immediately noticed the "professional" skills exhibited with the selection of Dealey Plaza, the TSBD, and its environs. The same professional criteria is obvious with the selection of Oswald "safe-houses in the Dallas suburds. It is quite obvious that this was done "for" LHO, and NOT by Oswald.

Red Flags went up over 40+ years ago, when experts perused the very obvious "signatures" left by the Intel operator(s) selections: The necessities of a rear entrance or a side alley; a nearby park or semi-forested area; a nearby library (needed for "dead-drops"); that the front of the house is situated with an intersection wich precludes "spotter vehicles" from any casual/routine parking for stake-outs; etc., and etc. !!

As Lt. Carrier so "politely" attempts to tutor: NO assist by law enforcement (nor Intel) is necessary. What is necessary for targeting by a "skilled" rifleman? -- his "personal" plan.

The "Sponsor" provides ALL that which is needed in order to place the target within a prescribed "killing zone" !!

Once the target enters ANY of the previously selected "MULTIPLE KILLING ZONES/WINDOWS" -- THAT TARGET IS DEAD MEAT !!

ENOUGH of this hundreds of "suspects?"bullxxxx disinformation spiel, ranting ever onward with all of this crap about "faces-in-the-crowd", "traitors-from-within" !! Oliver Stone hired us to "Plan" the assassination of an executive target, and we crawled all over EVERY building in the area; showing Stone and his crew exactly what goes into the kill zone-selection, hide-site(s) selection, and "E & E" Plan.

Uppermost in the planning of "non-Kamikaze" assassins is: The 'E & E" Plan. "Escape and Evasion" seems to be a critical factor in one's surviving long enough to collect one's rewards.

LHO didn't "bring a knife to a gunfight" -- he didn't bring anything at all !! Had he wanted to commit "suicide-by-cop", he wouldn't have left his snub-nose revolver at home. I have strong doubts that he ever possessed any weapon whatsoever. And rarest of the rare -- he risks self-defeating the singular opportunity at "15 Centuries-of-Fame"; by DENYING THE WHOLE GODDAMN THING ??!!

That he would even contemplate the use of an "EYETIE" throw-down & surrender rifle, or a worthless piece of xxxx "2 inch barreled" revolver, especially when for & $7 more, he could have purchased a semi-auto pistol -- and one very similar to the Colt .45 cal. pistol we Marines are ALL trained with at 'Boot Camp" !!

Once again, we have that most unique of alleged "fanatical assassins". One who fails to make the "head-on" shot [because the "sniper's nest" is a wet-dream]; then carries the still loaded rifle all the way across the "6th Floor??", taking TIME to hide it, runs down the stairway (and now unarmed), calmly exits the TSBD from the FRONT door, catches a bus, and then a taxi -- back to his "safe-house". He then allegedly takes a circuitous/deviated/detour (walking?) route from there to the site of later arrest -- a "THEATER" !!

Will somebody please grow some brains, and get off of the current disinformation campaign, every skilled in this research recognizes it as a continuation of the very same scheme -- which began even LONG before JFK's arrival in Texas.

Chairs,

GPH

__________________________

There's no disinformation campaign. The discussion is about whether security was adequate not who gets hung, drawn and quartered. When analysing this, the names of those responsible for security on the day will be mentioned. Do you want us to call them Mr.X and Mr.Y ?

Moreover, the evaluation of the SS and DPD's performance might result in criticism of some. Personally, I thought Bill Greer's performance was poor. I saw the Z-film. Whether it was fear, surprise or something else, he had a shocker.

As for the lofty speech about filthy rumor mongers and pukes scribbling gossipy books, I don't understand what you're blowing up about. It's an historical event, an unsolved crime and an official investigation judged the scene as "uniquely insecure". It's been discussed for over forty years and will probably be discussed for another hundred years.

Edited December 12, 2005 by Mark Stapleton