What happened in Dallas

[Gerry Hemming]

... I have earned my status through getting dirty and trying to educate and add to forum issues. ...

... DP was an excellent killing zone not for the fact that it made the hit fairly easy, but it accomodated the plan of success and allowing all assassins to walk away, while still setting up the patsy.

If you think DPD was lax in security, get an in with a USSS Agent and ask him/her what kind of assistance they get on the average from local LE. The answer will scare you.

I have wasted enough time on this and still have not heard specific issues. Only generic and broad ramblings about the corrupt DPD and how they blew it. Get real and look at it from beginning to end. If that is possible.

Al

Let's do specifics, then:

1. You stated that "USSS relies heavily upon local LE for security," but you have downplayed "local LE's" responsibility for "security" as really being nothing more than crowd and traffic control. This is to explain why "local LE" presence was drastically reduced once the motorcade reached this "ideal kill zone" because crowd and traffic control -

vice

security - was no longer expected to be much of an issue. Which is it: "local LE" is "relie(d) upon heavily" for security, for mere traffic and crowd control (and

not

security), or really not much at all for anything except to keep USSS from playing traffic cop?

<blockquote>(Note Mayor Earle Cabell's statement that "all possible security precautions were taken between the Dallas Police and the Secret Service." This statement was echoed exactly by newscaster Bill Lord prior to the "abortive transfer" with respect to that operation: "all possible security precautions have been taken ... Extreme precautions have been taken." DPD themselves said in a statement that Kennedy was afforded "the most stringent security precautions in the city's history." None of these comments reflect "traffic and crowd control only.")

2. You cite the logistical impossibility of USSS watching each and every window along a parade route, especially through a downtown area with lots of tall buildings. It is likewise true that DPD was not told by USSS to watch windows either. You also noted that USSS, in a moving motorcade, depends upon the ability to accelerate out of a situation for security. Since they don't keep people on the ground, and if they don't really "rel(y) heavily on local LE for security," are you suggesting that this is the only means of actual security afforded a dignitary-protectee in a motorcade?

</blockquote>It seems to me that you first laid claim that local police acted as the "eyes and ears on the ground" (i.e., security), but when I pointed out that this "security" seems to have been lacking once Kennedy reached Dealey Plaza, you "defended" DPD by backpedaling and saying that really, they were only there for traffic and crowd control, not to provide any real security function, hence it's perfectly plausible why there were no longer any men on the ground (rather than atop bridges) or mounted officers capable of speeds greater than running (other than the motorcade escorts, who were told not to break formation "no matter what happens" ... meaning that they, too, were not intended to act as any kind of "security" either).

(The actual quote is: "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 minimal if not altogether not needed.")

You stated that you "have been a grunt in motorcade route security, airport detail security, site arrival and site stating security, and motorcycle security where (you) have been a scout and lead car driver (and) been in charge of airport security and motorcade security," all of which belies your thesis that DPD was only to have provided crowd and traffic control ... or are you really saying that you've directed traffic and held back the crowd at all of these locations? Somehow I don't think so.

Your further statement that "DP was an excellent killing zone not for the fact that it made the hit fairly easy, but it accomodated the plan of success and allowing all assassins to walk away" suggests that nobody recognized this about the place (well, apparently somebody did ... just not on the "security" side of the equation!). Does this equate with the idea that DPD was for crowd control only, and that nobody did or was supposed to evaluate the route from that perspective?

You've also not explained your reference to "the history of incidents that plagued these type of visits" (in conjunction with the Adlai Stevenson problem). Can you expand on that?

I appreciate that you have earned your "status through getting dirty and trying to educate and add to forum issues," but you seem to be requiring that people ask the right questions first (and in the proper manner) before you can respond, and so far what responses you've made seem to be contradictory to your original assertions. You seem to "defend" DPD by saying that they really weren't supposed to do all the things that they seemingly should have and even claim to have done! Can you please clear up the muddle so we can all understand what it is you're really trying to say?

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

Duke:

Prior to the JFK assassination, the last serious "executive hit" had been: Tthat which was attempted against Harry S. Truman by "alleged" Latino radicals. While the assailants never even got inside the door of "Blair House" -- they did kill one of the "protective service" detailees, who was guarding the front door.

A close examination of that attempt remains classified, but what little of what later did leak out included:

[1] The deceased officer was armed with a "Navy/Commercial Model" Thompson Sub-Machine-Gun. However, his superiors forbade his having the weapon "cocked", albeit, with the safety engaged;

[2] As is the case with all non "double-action" automatic pistols, if you don't have a round in the chamber, it matters NOT that you might be "the-fastest-draw-in-the-west". This is especially so, if you are forced to use both hands to "crank" the slide back to "chamber" a round. Because, by the time you "go-into-battery", the bad guy has already gotten off multiple shots; and,

[3] Just before dying, the officer did fire his TSMG, but only hit the assailant once of about 16 rounds -- but, at least that was a fatal wound, and it dropped the bad guy to his knees.

That the shooters attacked the front door -- seems to be so typical of latino incidents, but it caused the USSS to revise its manuals and training protocols.

The USSS has very high standards, and requires extremes in training and drills. Other than S.W.A.T, S.P.U.. and some "special incident teams" -- the average street cop hasn't the first clue as to executive protection techniques. Why teach/learn something that will NEVER be used ??!!

For instance, the average cop [and the average "Joe 6-Pack"] might question a security detail as to the "WHY" the teams are welding the manhole covers in the middle of the streets, but NOT the covers on the sidewalks ??!! It has absolutely nothing to do with preventing a shooter, knifer, or spitwad hurler from popping up amidst a motorcade.

Nor is it to prevent assassins from placing explosive charges, per se !!

[Even with a manhole with an "un-welded" iron cover, the explosive gases will take the path of least resistance, and end up blowing all of the drains clean of fecal matter and trash.]

It instead, has to do with a very special type of "device' -- which only the most skilled of "powder-monkeys" might put together, and then, only with luck, correctly (and effectively) emplace said I.E.D. !!

[This is why such curious inquiries are met with blank stares, as even the welding team has no clue as to the "why" -- but the supevisor knows.]

What we are missing entirely here, is the following step-by-step protocols:

[1] Long before any specific selection of "hit team" is made, a target study must be conducted, and this takes a considerable amount of time;

[2] The sponsor(s) wishes have to be considered, i.e., is the "end result" of this operation against the targeted party (or parties) fulfilled by just a "scare", a "snatch" (kidnapping), less than fatal incapacitation, or deadly force ?;

[3] How much "stalking" is required [and by which autonomous entities];

[4] What kind of, and how many, diversions are necessary to distract extant security forces, both close to, and on the periphery of the target(s) "personal space" ?;

[5] If several different and distinct locales must be selected -- in order to fulfill "the contract", how many separate and autonomous ["compartmented"] teams are to be recruited and prepared. And how many "controllers" [compartmented & autonomous] are necessary for the proper exercise of the event ?; and,

[6] How many "patsies" must be placed at each locale, and how much disruption of later forensic probes must be implemented ? Moreover, how many "phony patsies" [later found to have strong alibis] will be tossed into "the grab-bag" ?!!

If the sponsor(s) have VIP influence/control -- how far in advance can the planning of the event be made ?!

How much coercion, extortion, blackmailing, and use of "moles" -- is necessary to cause VIP elements to go along with the program. And this must be accomplished, even despite their complete ignorance of: Either the scheme or its outcome ?!

["moles"] are not necessarily persons who work for foreign entities, by might just be from political, religious, tribal, or revenge seeking insider "snitches/informants". Most often, they are themselves, simply amongst the cluster of "mushrooms" !!

The very first questions asked in the aftermath of the RFK assassination were:

[A] Did Sirhan Sirhan "always" carry a firearm to work at the Ambassador Hotel; and,

How far in advance did the kitchen staff become aware of RFK's planned "exit routing", and who was it that so informed them ?!

Having been much too close "in proximity" to the event, I have made it a point to avoid any in-depth study of than June 5th, 1968 tragedy.

In answer to a member's inquiry, as to the "why" had me visiting the Sirhan family home the next morning ?! I was then a Special Agent with the "Special Problems Unit", City of Los Angeles.

[sPU - an Intel operation which was controlled by then Mayor Sam Yorty -- directed by his office ONLY !!]

At that time, I was an asset of JJA's MK/CHAOS projects, which had been organized to counter, and ultimately derail & destroy -- the MH/CHAOS projects. Said projects having "GONE ROGUE" during 1967. [The "rogueing" was just one of the inherent risks with all projects, in that they are oftentimes deviated by "zealots and/or moles"!!]

No great skill was required, and no great excitement was to be had. The usual 99% extreme boredom, interspersed with moments of "stark terror". [And this was before the availability of "Depends" !!]

Chairs,

GPH

________________________

[Lynne Foster]

You don't need too much coercion, blackmail and extortion, when you can turn over a guilty party to Hoover's FBI and to Jim Garrison's obsession to cover up the truth about the Kennedy assassination.

[Duke Lane]

Gerry,

I'll get to the specifics later, but first let me ask the question that I'd asked you before, in the event you hadn't seen it (you are something of a celebrity here, eh? ), and that is:

How would you rate the killing of a cop as an E&E tactic?

I might as well ask, too, "how would you set it up" if you thought it was a good maneuver?

More later.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Gerry,

I'll get to the specifics later, but first let me ask the question that I'd asked you before, in the event you hadn't seen it (you are something of a celebrity here, eh? ), and that is:

How would you rate the killing of a cop as an E&E tactic?

I might as well ask, too, "how would you set it up" if you thought it was a good maneuver?

More later.

=====================================================================

Although certainly not Gerry, the killing of Tippit would, by far, be more in line with a "diversionary" activity than an actual part of an E & E plan.

Therefore, it establishes three avenues:

1. Intentional Act for diversionary purpose.

2. Random Coincidence.

3. Intentional act based on prior association, and elimination of the link to the association, and/or threat.

("Poor Dumb Cop") certainly tends to indicate prior knowledge of J.D. & his cerebral capability.

Personally, I have little faith in#2.

And, actually give only marginal consideration to#1.

Then, when one throws in, for good measure, the facts which demonstrate Tippit's former Security Guard association with the Dallas Theater as well as LHO's attempted hiding here, the "common denominator" becomes one of prior association.

Not to mention the slightly "beat to death" Confederate legacy of both parties!

Tom

P.S. The operative wording is "Escape", which LHO did not do, and "Evade", in which he also appears to have failed.

Not to even mention that part of the plan which assumes that the Bus will be allowed to drive along for one to catch enroute home from the TSDB, etc; etc; etc.

[Mark Stapleton]

Al and Gerry,

Hate to intrude on this "love in", but seriously, isn't your explanation just a high falutin' crock?

Maybe I'm not sufficiently well versed in "protection speak" but my interpretation is that you feel that because "eliminating the target is almost assured" and "no protection plan can diminish it's success" then the serious deficiency in security in Dallas was irrelevant.

Ridiculous. It was carefully planned down to the smallest detail. The planners can't undertake such a high stakes gambit without a comprehensive plan. Presidential security was the first thing they would have discussed. The assassination wasn't a wild gamble undertaken without consideration of the Presidential security arrangements. Protection plans for the President had to be made "favorable" for the conspirators otherwise they wouldn't have risked it. A failed attempt would have increased the risk of exposure. Why? Because you've failed to get your man in the White House. You can't depend on enquiries being scuttled. It's a very uncertain outcome.

Security in Dallas was compromised. Face it. They weren't playing for pennies so why leave anything to chance? It's illogical.

The same argument could be used to explain away the DPD's performance in protecting Oswald. "We couldn't have protected him--he was going to die anyway". It's the same as saying, "tie him to a tree and we'll use him for target practise".

Mark,

First of all, I find your "love in" comment offensive to say the least. You do not know me or Hemming and your rude behavior is uncalled for. I have earned my status through getting dirty and trying to educate and add to forum issues. This crap is one of the reasons I am hesitant to even post. I have been in law enforcement for almost 23 years and have worked more protective service details than you have likely read about. If I were to write a book on military operations of the early eighties, you would probably consider it fiction because you could not comprehend reality of what is going on in your own government.

If you would like to be civil and give me the respect of a stranger on the street, I will be happy to address your issues. Actually, I will bring you into reality that apparently from your posts you cannot conceive. Consider a slow moving open limo along a stretch of four to six deep onlookers with high buildings on each side and then say that the president was not at risk from the beginning. If you cannot fathom this, then I have nothing more to say to you. DP was an excellent killing zone not for the fact that it made the hit fairly easy, but it accomodated the plan of success and allowing all assassins to walk away, while still setting up the patsy.

If you think DPD was lax in security, get an in with a USSS Agent and ask him/her what kind of assistance they get on the average from local LE. The answer will scare you.

I have wasted enough time on this and still have not heard specific issues. Only generic and broad ramblings about the corrupt DPD and how they blew it. Get real and look at it from beginning to end. If that is possible.

Al

Al,

Sorry for any offense regarding my "love in" comment. I wasn't implying anything like that. (although you must admit Gerry's quite a handsome devil--JOKING, JOKING. I'm still trying to recover from Mark's amusing word picture).

My problem with your argument is that you seem to be stating what is already self-evident. DP was incredibly insecure, and provided for easy access and egress, but as Duke pointed out, this was all part of the Presidential security scenario which the DPD and USSS should have been cognizant. My own belief is that the selection of the route (and hairpin turn past the TSBD) constitutes a security failure in itself, which must be sheeted home to the DPD and USSS. As one who has experience in these matters, what do you think?

I believe you or Gerry mentioned the fact that previous motorcades passed through similar "unsafe" zones. You've got a point there. Makes me think about the possibility that DP was the intended endgame in a sequence of public appearances designed to give the Presidential entourage a false sense of "security". The assassination plan might have been in the works much longer than researchers believe. Just a thought.

Gotta fly. I'm checking other threads for unauthorised "love-ins".

[Duke Lane]

Although certainly not Gerry, the killing of Tippit would, by far, be more in line with a "diversionary" activity than an actual part of an E & E plan.

Therefore, it establishes three avenues:

1. Intentional Act for diversionary purpose.

2. Random Coincidence.

3. Intentional act based on prior association, and elimination of the link to the association, and/or threat.

("Poor Dumb Cop") certainly tends to indicate prior knowledge of J.D. & his cerebral capability.

Personally, I have little faith in#2.

And, actually give only marginal consideration to#1.

Then, when one throws in, for good measure, the facts which demonstrate Tippit's former Security Guard association with the Dallas Theater as well as LHO's attempted hiding here, the "common denominator" becomes one of prior association.

Not to mention the slightly "beat to death" Confederate legacy of both parties!

Tom

P.S. The operative wording is "Escape", which LHO did not do, and "Evade", in which he also appears to have failed. Not to even mention that part of the plan which assumes that the Bus will be allowed to drive along for one to catch enroute home from the TSDB, etc; etc; etc.

I'm thinking that a diversion would be a part of an E&E plan ... no?

Of course, your avenues rest on the assumption that LHO was the shooter. If you take him out of the picture and think any shooter(s) planning an event like this, then what?

As for Tippit's security job, as I best recall, that was at a theater other than the Texas Theater (I'm thinking Stevens Theater?). That being the case, we don't have prior association, so you're left with point 1. Even if it was the case, why "eliminate the link to the association" when the only association was LHO having been a patron in the theater where JDT worked. What's to eliminate?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Although certainly not Gerry, the killing of Tippit would, by far, be more in line with a "diversionary" activity than an actual part of an E & E plan.

Therefore, it establishes three avenues:

1. Intentional Act for diversionary purpose.

2. Random Coincidence.

3. Intentional act based on prior association, and elimination of the link to the association, and/or threat.

("Poor Dumb Cop") certainly tends to indicate prior knowledge of J.D. & his cerebral capability.

Personally, I have little faith in#2.

And, actually give only marginal consideration to#1.

Then, when one throws in, for good measure, the facts which demonstrate Tippit's former Security Guard association with the Dallas Theater as well as LHO's attempted hiding here, the "common denominator" becomes one of prior association.

Not to mention the slightly "beat to death" Confederate legacy of both parties!

Tom

P.S. The operative wording is "Escape", which LHO did not do, and "Evade", in which he also appears to have failed. Not to even mention that part of the plan which assumes that the Bus will be allowed to drive along for one to catch enroute home from the TSDB, etc; etc; etc.

I'm thinking that a diversion would be a part of an E&E plan ... no?

Of course, your avenues rest on the assumption that LHO was the shooter. If you take him out of the picture and think any shooter(s) planning an event like this, then what?

As for Tippit's security job, as I best recall, that was at a theater other than the Texas Theater (I'm thinking Stevens Theater?). That being the case, we don't have prior association, so you're left with point 1. Even if it was the case, why "eliminate the link to the association" when the only association was LHO having been a patron in the theater where JDT worked. What's to eliminate?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

WC Testimony of Julia Postal:

Officer Tippit used to work part time for us years ago. I didn't know him personally.

Mr. BALL. You mean he guarded the theatre?

Mrs. POSTAL. On Friday nights and Saturdays, canvass the theatre, you know, and that

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[Duke Lane]

WC Testimony of Julia Postal:

Mrs. POSTAL. Officer Tippit used to work part time for us years ago. I didn't know him personally.

Mr. BALL. You mean he guarded the theatre?

Mrs. POSTAL. On Friday nights and Saturdays, canvass the theatre, you know, and that

Interesting ... tho' I'm not sure what she meant by "I didn't know him personally." Does that mean she didn't work there herself when JDT supposedly did (i.e., "I didn't know him myself"), or merely that she didn't attend parties at his house? If the former, then she could well be mistaken, or have overheard something someone had said afterward ... or perhaps even the Stevens Theater (or whatever it was named) might've been owned by the same people? Even still, "years ago" would have been before LHO's time in Oak Cliff ... and again, what "link" would exist in such a situation that LHO would want to "sever?" It doesn't make sense to me ....

[Gerry Hemming]

Gerry,

I'll get to the specifics later, but first let me ask the question that I'd asked you before, in the event you hadn't seen it (you are something of a celebrity here, eh? ), and that is:

How would you rate the killing of a cop as an E&E tactic?

I might as well ask, too, "how would you set it up" if you thought it was a good maneuver?

More later.

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

Duke:

If the killing of Tippit was the key to cause a stampede into the Oak Cliff area, where "somebody?" knew exactly where LHO sat "awaiting?" for s sceduled "Treff?" [R/V] with a "handler" or "cut-out" -- then it succeeded beyond expectations.

My most serious questions to Oliver Stone [1991] with reference to Johnny Brewer were these:

[1] The majority of the DPD patrol/detective cars speeding across the "Viaduct" would have taken the most "direct" route to 10th & Patton; which meant using Zang and/or Jefferson to Davis Street, then turning south the 3 blocks to the crime scene;

[2] How could both the ticket taker and the manager of the Texas Theater done anything more than "wonder" as to the "DISTANT SOUNDS" of the old style "Q-Siren" [the electronic sirens weren't yet available];

[3] WC testimony, exhibits, etc., indicate that both the manager and the ticket [Wickett Cab] taker were completely ignorant of the Tippit shooting, that is: until Brewer followed them into the "LOBBY" and began ranting about: Both a cop shooting & a suspicious guy who had "sneeked?" into the theater w/o paying;

[4] That the manager refused to call the police for quite a long time, and finally only gave in when Brewer became very loud and highy abusive;

[5] While filming "JFK", we tested whether someone inside the shoe store could possibly hear the intermittent whining of the old model sirens, and we found it impossible -- save for the fact that if indeed one of the DPD vehicles had passed in front of the shoe store;

[6] We could never get a time line [from the "Art Dept., Rusconi, et al.] as to when the Dallas radio stations first broadcast a "clear' report of the Tippit shooting, that is: with the location specifically described, and moreover, there were NO "police radio scanners" (that Brewer might have used) available to the public during 1963; and,

[7] When Stone raised the issue as to how Brewer might keep a straight face and lie through his teeth, if in fact he was part of the conspiracy? -- I stated that if he was compartmented, and ONLY did his small task of reporting LHO, then he -- like the rest of us "usual suspects/subjects of interest", could even work on a JFK assassination movie !!; and, [stone didn't see the humor in that ?!]

[8] Given a choice, and when setting up a patsy -- drastic measures would be required when the targeted patsy has eluded the non-existent "manhunt" !!

I also had several discussions with OS as to the professional techniques used for VIP hits, and one included the circumstances where one of the shooter/support team "criticals" is detained/arrested by local police or others.

I explained that, the "back-up/controller" would have just a few seconds to decide whether the cop(s) would be taken out; or "everybody goes !!" -- (and order by radio, or other devices) that both the "critical(s) and the cop(s) are forthwith taken out on the spot, or 'down-the-road-a-piece" !!

Currently, the preferred method of removing cops from a target area is by the calling in of a house fire with shots fired (getting police radio frequency crystals is quite routine), or a couple of distant explosions. Hollywood has abused that scenario for years.

Chairs

GPH

__________________

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Gerry,

I'll get to the specifics later, but first let me ask the question that I'd asked you before, in the event you hadn't seen it (you are something of a celebrity here, eh? ), and that is:

How would you rate the killing of a cop as an E&E tactic?

I might as well ask, too, "how would you set it up" if you thought it was a good maneuver?

More later.

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

Duke:

If the killing of Tippit was the key to cause a stampede into the Oak Cliff area, where "somebody?" knew exactly where LHO sat "awaiting?" for s sceduled "Treff?" [R/V] with a "handler" or "cut-out" -- then it succeeded beyond expectations.

My most serious questions to Oliver Stone [1991] with reference to Johnny Brewer were these:

[1] The majority of the DPD patrol/detective cars speeding across the "Viaduct" would have taken the most "direct" route to 10th & Patton; which meant using Zang and/or Jefferson to Davis Street, then turning south the 3 blocks to the crime scene;

[2] How could both the ticket taker and the manager of the Texas Theater done anything more than "wonder" as to the "DISTANT SOUNDS" of the old style "Q-Siren" [the electronic sirens weren't yet available];

[3] WC testimony, exhibits, etc., indicate that both the manager and the ticket [Wickett Cab] taker were completely ignorant of the Tippit shooting, that is: until Brewer followed them into the "LOBBY" and began ranting about: Both a cop shooting & a suspicious guy who had "sneeked?" into the theater w/o paying;

[4] That the manager refused to call the police for quite a long time, and finally only gave in when Brewer became very loud and highy abusive;

[5] While filming "JFK", we tested whether someone inside the shoe store could possibly hear the intermittent whining of the old model sirens, and we found it impossible -- save for the fact that if indeed one of the DPD vehicles had passed in front of the shoe store;

[6] We could never get a time line [from the "Art Dept., Rusconi, et al.] as to when the Dallas radio stations first broadcast a "clear' report of the Tippit shooting, that is: with the location specifically described, and moreover, there were NO "police radio scanners" (that Brewer might have used) available to the public during 1963; and,

[7] When Stone raised the issue as to how Brewer might keep a straight face and lie through his teeth, if in fact he was part of the conspiracy? -- I stated that if he was compartmented, and ONLY did his small task of reporting LHO, then he -- like the rest of us "usual suspects/subjects of interest", could even work on a JFK assassination movie !!; and, [stone didn't see the humor in that ?!]

[8] Given a choice, and when setting up a patsy -- drastic measures would be required when the targeted patsy has eluded the non-existent "manhunt" !!

I also had several discussions with OS as to the professional techniques used for VIP hits, and one included the circumstances where one of the shooter/support team "criticals" is detained/arrested by local police or others.

I explained that, the "back-up/controller" would have just a few seconds to decide whether the cop(s) would be taken out; or "everybody goes !!" -- (and order by radio, or other devices) that both the "critical(s) and the cop(s) are forthwith taken out on the spot, or 'down-the-road-a-piece" !!

Currently, the preferred method of removing cops from a target area is by the calling in of a house fire with shots fired (getting police radio frequency crystals is quite routine), or a couple of distant explosions. Hollywood has abused that scenario for years.

Chairs

GPH

__________________

Obviously, Brewer was mad because LHO did not puchase shoes on his "prior" visit.

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

Mr. BREWER - He just looked funny to me. Well, in the first place, I had seen him some place before. I think he had been in my store before. And when you wait on somebody, you recognize them, and he just seemed funny. His hair was sort of messed up and looked like he had been running, and he looked seared, and he looked funny.

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

I suppose that in working around those shoe stores for so much time in his younger days, LHO must have merely had some sort of "shoe fetish", and therefore had the need to hang around in these establishments.

[Duke Lane]

Duke:

Prior to the JFK assassination, the last serious "executive hit" had been: Tthat which was attempted against Harry S. Truman by "alleged" Latino radicals. While the assailants never even got inside the door of "Blair House" -- they did kill one of the "protective service" detailees, who was guarding the front door.

A close examination of that attempt remains classified, but what little of what later did leak out included:

[1] The deceased officer was armed with a "Navy/Commercial Model" Thompson Sub-Machine-Gun. However, his superiors forbade his having the weapon "cocked", albeit, with the safety engaged;

[2] As is the case with all non "double-action" automatic pistols, if you don't have a round in the chamber, it matters NOT that you might be "the-fastest-draw-in-the-west". This is especially so, if you are forced to use both hands to "crank" the slide back to "chamber" a round. Because, by the time you "go-into-battery", the bad guy has already gotten off multiple shots; and,

[3] Just before dying, the officer did fire his TSMG, but only hit the assailant once of about 16 rounds -- but, at least that was a fatal wound, and it dropped the bad guy to his knees.

That the shooters attacked the front door -- seems to be so typical of latino incidents, but it caused the USSS to revise its manuals and training protocols.

Gerry,

You had written to the effect that there are very limited ROE for USSS in Presidential Protection Details with respect to using guns:

The S.O.P. during "1963" (and thoroughly revised since) was that:

[1] All vehicle-borne agents would insure that the "Executive(s)" would be immediately rushed out of the "Threat-Zone", and thereupon they would be tasked to run interference for the "Primary", guaranteeing his arrival at a pre-designated "Rally-Point". [said Rally-point would be a safe distance from the "event" or the "threat" -- and usually was a pre-secured series of buildings along the route of travel.];

[2] NO vehicle-borne agents were permitted to return fire, or engage in a fire-fight, nor dismount from the vehicles to apprehend suspects, or even "actual shooters";

[3] NO vehicle borne agents were permitted to fire upon an actual shooter, that is: until said shooter (after firing) had already gained close proximity to the "Executive(s)", and there existed no other recourse;

[4] Since ALL crowd control police officers are instructed to always face away from a motorcade, the only time the order would be given to "take-out" a uniformed shooter (actual or police imposter), would again be: Only if the shooter gained close proximity to the "Executive(s)"; and,

[5] Since 1963 (and the passage of the 25th Amendment) the Vice-President is taken to a separate and secure "Rally- Point" -- as are the President "Pro Tem" of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House; wherever they might be located at the time of the attack !!

This has always sort of confused me: why even have guns if you're not going to be able to use them unless a shooter was "right on top of" the protectee? Photos of JFK's limo on Stemmons Freeway clearly show USSS in the follow-up car with automatic rifles held at the ready ... for what?

As to #5, that almost seems an outgrowth of the Lincoln assassination where Secy of State Seward and others were also (missed) targets. One wonders why this wasn't already in place in 1963, and why LBJ was travelling in the same motorcade as his "predecessor" (who was only his boss at that point, but presumably his predecessor if something happened to him): it seems several other countries have had this safeguard in place, such as the crown prince never travelling with the king kind-of-thing.

Was it mere complacency, there not having been an attempt on the life of the CinC since Truman?

The USSS has very high standards, and requires extremes in training and drills. Other than S.W.A.T, S.P.U.. and some "special incident teams" -- the average street cop hasn't the first clue as to executive protection techniques. Why teach/learn something that will NEVER be used ??!!

For instance, the average cop [and the average "Joe 6-Pack"] might question a security detail as to the "WHY" the teams are welding the manhole covers in the middle of the streets, but NOT the covers on the sidewalks ??!! It has absolutely nothing to do with preventing a shooter, knifer, or spitwad hurler from popping up amidst a motorcade.

Incidentally, as I'm sure you well know, this is an often-cited example of what USSS "didn't do" for the JFK parade (along with having a gazillion agents inside every tall building along the route, and the too-sharp-of-a-curve deal turning onto Elm Street from Houston): since the USSS didn't detail what they "normally" do or what they did or didn't do in this case, how does anyone know whether manholes were or weren't welded? I'm sure that the welding would only be "spot" welding since, as soon as a motorcade's gone by, they've got to be able to be used again for "regular" purposes, so if they weren't welded shut even a day later ...?

As you detailed, the likelihood of someone being able to effectively utilize a gambit such as this is pretty slim, it surprises that this would be a "routine" procedure while so many other, seemingly much more obvious problems weren't taken into consideration and acted upon. One in particular would seem to be why Lawson didn't insist upon taking the full and complete motorcade route rather than being satisfied with a description of where it went as he and DPD turned left onto Houston at the bottom of Main rather than right and 120° left onto Elm into an "ambush." A second would be why the on-the-ground DPD "security" was not scrutinized more closely for who was on the ground in DP and in what configuration (i.e., not mounted, on foot only).

This seems more a "given" than "20/20 hindsight" ....?

What we are missing entirely here, is the following step-by-step protocols:

[1] Long before any specific selection of "hit team" is made, a target study must be conducted, and this takes a considerable amount of time;

[2] The sponsor(s) wishes have to be considered, i.e., is the "end result" of this operation against the targeted party (or parties) fulfilled by just a "scare", a "snatch" (kidnapping), less than fatal incapacitation, or deadly force ?;

[3] How much "stalking" is required [and by which autonomous entities];

[4] What kind of, and how many, diversions are necessary to distract extant security forces, both close to, and on the periphery of the target(s) "personal space" ?;

[5] If several different and distinct locales must be selected -- in order to fulfill "the contract", how many separate and autonomous ["compartmented"] teams are to be recruited and prepared. And how many "controllers" [compartmented & autonomous] are necessary for the proper exercise of the event ?; and,

[6] How many "patsies" must be placed at each locale, and how much disruption of later forensic probes must be implemented ? Moreover, how many "phony patsies" [later found to have strong alibis] will be tossed into "the grab-bag" ?!!

If the sponsor(s) have VIP influence/control -- how far in advance can the planning of the event be made ?!

How much coercion, extortion, blackmailing, and use of "moles" -- is necessary to cause VIP elements to go along with the program. And this must be accomplished, even despite their complete ignorance of: Either the scheme or its outcome ?!

["moles"] are not necessarily persons who work for foreign entities, by might just be from political, religious, tribal, or revenge seeking insider "snitches/informants". Most often, they are themselves, simply amongst the cluster of "mushrooms" !!

The very first questions asked in the aftermath of the RFK assassination were:

[A] Did Sirhan Sirhan "always" carry a firearm to work at the Ambassador Hotel; and,

How far in advance did the kitchen staff become aware of RFK's planned "exit routing", and who was it that so informed them ?!

... At that time, I was an asset of JJA's MK/CHAOS projects, which had been organized to counter, and ultimately derail & destroy -- the MH/CHAOS projects. Said projects having "GONE ROGUE" during 1967. [The "rogueing" was just one of the inherent risks with all projects, in that they are oftentimes deviated by "zealots and/or moles"!!]

No great skill was required, and no great excitement was to be had. The usual 99% extreme boredom, interspersed with moments of "stark terror". [And this was before the availability of "Depends" !!] ....

Sorry about the "Depends" issue, but they tend not to look as flattering on the lower torso as kevlar does on the upper!

As to the question of RFK's "exit routing," a similar question could reasonably be asked with respect to JFK's route into DP. A lot of people have raised the questions (a) why they didn't continue down Main St and hop the curb (or put "temporary ramps" on either side of it to make the "jump" easier on all concerned); and ( why they didn't continue down Main all the way to Industrial.

There were two other possibilities, of course, that nobody seems to pay much notice to: (a) they could have turned on any large intersection along Main a mere 90° and 90° again onto Elm, thus proceeding straight across Elm past the TSBD and avoiding the 120° turn; or ( they could have turned one block earlier off of Harwood and onto Elm, avoiding Main St altogether, and accomplished the same thing as above. It seems as if any one of these options would have been something that Lawson and/or Grant would have picked up on if they'd ridden the entire proposed route.

(There was, of course, also the secondary route that avoided downtown altogether, but that would have fairly well precluded a parade!)