Henry Rybka

[Vasilios Vazakas]

"But be careful: "The Secret Service" did not "play a [conspiratorial] role" in the JFK assassination. "The Secret Service," like "the CIA," "the FBI," or "the government," did not conspire to kill JFK. This is not a simple matter of semantics."

It is a misatke to say that the CIA killed Kennedy. The correct description is to say that elements of the CIA were involved, but not the CIA as an organization.
Some of his high ranking officers were taking orders that day, not from the US Government as they should, but form CIA's true creators.
If you can understand that then you can understand who the sponsors were.
Unless your name is Lamar Waldron, and you believe that they were taking orders from the Mafia. Even worse if your name is Gerald Posner
you believe that it was the act of a lone nut. Then again this is your only chance for a Pulitzer prize.

[Magda Hassan]

If you can understand that then you can understand who the sponsors were.
Unless your name is Lamar Waldron, and you believe that they were taking orders from the Mafia. Even worse if your name is Gerald Posner
you believe that it was the act of a lone nut. Then again this is your only chance for a Pulitzer prize.

:banghead: Oh, yes, indeed Vasillios.

[Phil Dragoo]

Vince Palamara explains the incident at this youtube video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCHGNvTvqU0

He explains it was Don Lawton, not Henry "Hank" Rybkathat the mistake he made in identification does not change the fact that Lawton had ridden on the back of the limo in Chicago and Tampa, but was ordered off in Dallascontrary to Blain's lying explanation.

Vince references his review of The Kennedy Detail on ctka.net:

http://www.ctka.net/reviews/kennedydetailreview.html

It's excellent. He's killer. Blain (and Hill) are disgusting.

Vince refutes Blain's contention that Kennedy ordered the agents off the limo.

Vince makes it clear that from talking with the agents he found they all said he was easy to work for, never ordered them off, let them do their job, and was very nice.

There's a nasty handful of Secret Service officers identified in the literature as highly suspicious.

I found that when Greer applied the I BRAKE FOR SNIPERS bumper sticker to the limo my sixth sense went off.

Add that Emery Roberts ordered Lawton off the rear.

That he ordered the agents in the Queen Mary not to move when shots were fired.

And that Elmer Moore badgered Malcolm Perry by phone all Friday night to force him to recant his description of the throat wound as one of entry.

And that Moore called Kennedy "a traitor".

Also whatever jackass signed off on the tighter-than-ninety-degree turn off Houston onto Elm

And the agents who stayed out drinking then froze like cigar store Indians when it was time to do their job

Like Kellerman who figured all he had to do was WATCH

There were many departures from normal procedure that day; Vince illustrates these in his work.

I have never seen any proof of a test of security that day; lots of talk, which, with five bucks, is good for a crappucino at Starbucks.

How about that Secret Service agent on the knoll. Was it Bernard Barker the Watergate Op 40 tool. Weberman and Canfield seem to think so.

But hey, it was just some homeless guy mugged that day so don't make waves.

Waterboarding Blain wouldn't get any intel. But it would be fun.

[Vasilios Vazakas]

"I have never seen any proof of a test of security that day; lots of talk, which, with five bucks, is good for a crappucino at Starbucks."

Hi Phil

Correct me if i am wrong, but Vince Palamara was one of those that talked about security tests and simulated attack that day. Maybe you should ask him to explain you
how he came up with that theory.

[Charles Drago]

The notion of a security strip related to some sort of "test" or provocation simultaneously and independently originated with George Michael Evica and yours truly at a time prior to our initial meeting. Later, we discussed the possibility in depth.

It was George Michael who broached the subject with Palamara.

It is well established that standard security was stripped from the motorcade by order of Secret Service officials -- and NOT by JFK -- thus rendering the motorcade, in the words of the HSCA, "uniquely insecure."

Peter Dale Scott writes:

"Another army reserve officer in Dealey Plaza may have been Winston Lawson,
the White House Secret Service agent responsible for the choice of the Kennedy
motorcade route (4 WH 318). Lawson's first three reports of what happened on
and before November 22 raise considerable questions about his performance.
For example he reported that motorcycles were used on "the right and left flanks
of the President's car" (17 WH 605; cf. 17 WH 624, 18 WH 741) although photographs
show that they accompanied at the rear (21 WH 768770). Numerous
later reports from the Dallas police agreed that at Lawson's own instructions the
proposed side escorts were redeployed to the rear of the car (7 WH 581,
3 WH 244, 18 WH 809, 21 WH 571). This change, ostensibly for the sake of security,
would appear to leave the President more open to a possible crossfire."

HSCA concluded:

"The Secret Service's alteration of the original Dallas Police Department motorcycle deployment
plan prevented the use of maximum possible security precautions … Surprisingly, the
security measure used in the prior motorcades during the same Texas visit shows that the
deployment of motorcycles in Dallas by the Secret Service may have been uniquely insecure
… The Secret Service knew more than a day before November 22 that the President did not
want motorcycles riding alongside or parallel to the Presidential vehicle …. "

As far as JFK's security preferences as described in the final sentence above are concerned, Vince Palamara writes,

"One would have to wonder if that last sentence was pure sarcasm, as at least 6 motorcycles
surrounded JFK's limousine (including one or two directly beside him) on June 29, 1962 in Mexico City,
March 23, 1963 in Chicago,on the European tour of JuneJuly 1963 (encompassing Germany, Italy,
England, and Ireland), the November 18, 1963 Florida trip,and, most importantly, in San
Antonio on November 21, 1963, Houston on November 21, 1963, and Fort Worth on the morning
of November 22, 1963. Indeed, the USSS Final Survey Report dated November 30, 1963 for the
Houston Trip of November 21, 1963 states: 'On all motorcade movements, six motorcycles
flanked the Presidential limousine … in the downtown area of Houston, in addition to the six
motorcycles flanking the Presidential limousine, 24 motorcycles flanked the President's
limousine near the sidewalk (12 on each side).' As HSCA attorney Belford Lawson noted:
'If JFK's views of motorcycle deployment were well known, then why did it take six days for the SS
to convey them to the DPD?'"

(for Palamara's full essay, see http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v4n...pter06.pdf )

Since JFK did not interfere with security provisions for what turned out to be his final presidential motorcade, and given that that parade was made "uniquely insecure" on the orders of Secret Service agent Winston Lawson, we are left with the unavoidable question:

Why would ranking Secret Service agents strip security from the motorcade?

What later would become the shared Evica/Drago hypothesis describes a two-tiered conspiracy structure accounting for the security strip. In order to enlist the cooperation of non-conspiratorial, mid-level Secret Service personnel, true conspirators within the SS concocted the need for a test of their agency's effectiveness in non-laboratory circumstances, if you will.

Hence the stand-down order when "gunfire" erupted in the plaza -- "gunfire" that was anticipated as part of the security strip.

Given the reasonable expectation that Dallas would represent an environment hostile to JFK, how could Secret Service conspirators hope to convince their honorable colleagues that Dealey Plaza was not too dangerous a choice for the security stripping exercise?

My own hypothesis: The faux Chicago plot had been designed to mimic the Dallas operation AND to be thwarted -- thus reassuring non-conspiratorial Secret Service officials that the danger had passed and the coast was clear for the test.

But why test in the first place? How might conspirators have answered that question when posed by honest agents?

To create the false scenario that a Castro agent had ATTEMPTED to kill JFK, and thus provide a casus belli for another invasion of Cuba.

Finally: How, after the "test" turned into a real assassination, could the silence of non-conspiratorial Secret Service agents aware of the "test" scenario be secured?

Through a combination of threat to person (We're all accessories now.) and institution (If the "test" story gets out, the Secret Service will be broken into a thousand pieces and scattered to the winds.)

[Phil Dragoo]

I asked Vince to come discuss and explain.

I don't question the deductive power of Charles and George Michael and the research of Vince.

I've not seen anything said by the principals, nor any document clarifying beyond informed speculation.

I think the control of the Secret Service was by blackguards.

I think their standard managerial style was Do It Because We Won't Tell You Twice.

I think JFK was assured the Secret Service had taken care of the threat in Chicago and that Dallas was no problem.

A deception by design as Charles has said--that was the function of the Chicago simulated threat.

It didn't need depth, it didn't have depth.

Everything in Dallas was blamed on a president who didn't want anything between him and the people.

All lies of course, because, as Vince points out tirelessly, JFK never interfered, never ordered the agents off the limo.

And the cutting of motorcycles, the route, the actions of the agents--Emery Roberts said Don't Move

Obama blew through a sleepy town this week, a forty- or fifty-car convoy overflown by choppers

The last test of security broke a sheriff's deputy's arm

(I got an email from The Church Lady on this matter, but all those go to Junk--apparently I've strayed from the Official Dogma: woof)

[Vasilios Vazakas]

We are in full agreement regarding the security test.
When i first joined the forum i posted a reply to your thread, "The Chicago Plot:A Hypothesis"
My reply titled "Dallas organized similar to 911" [URL="https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?6265-The-Chicago-Plot-A-Hypothesis/page13&highlight=chicago+hypothesis"]https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?6265-The-Chicago-Plot-A-Hypothesis/page13&highlight=chicago+hypothesis

w[/URL]as along the same lines.
Below i present my own theory, speculation if you will, regarding the plot to kill JFK.
I believe that SAS were planning the assassination of Castro and blame it to a Soviet sympatizer like Oswald. But which Oswald?
When Oswald left for Switzerland he had his birth certificate with him and later the US intelligence suspected that somebody took his certificate to impersonate him
and create a Soviet Illegal that would be placed in USA to conduct assassinations.
The other Oswald call him Lee as per Armstrong) who did not go to Russia went back to USA and got himself involved in black ops against Castro. However he needed a cover a get away scenario if he was caught. So they created the Soviet sympathizer (call him Harvey), the one that formed the FPCC in New Orleans and worked hard to establish his communist bona fides.
If there was word that Lee was trying to kill Castro, they would blame Harvey and Russia. Harvey was also there to create a cover and disinform the enemy, create a false reality, a Soviet Illegal that was trying to kill Kennedy instead. So the Cubans instead for searching for an Oswald that was trying to kill their leader, they were seeing an Oswald trying to kill JFK instead. This was the counter intelligence part of the plot to kill Castro. If Lee managed to kill Castro they would blame a Soviet Illegal that turned traitor, ie Oswald the Illegal per ZR/RIFLE guidelines.
If Lee could not manage to kill Castro they could use Harvey to attempt to kill Kennedy and blame it on Castro so to cause the invasion of Cuba and the demise of Castro.
Either way, Castro was targeted but in a different way. That's why Oswald threatened to kill Kennedy in Mexico.
So the CIA convinced the SS to run security tests coupled with possible simulated attacks against JFK in Chicago, Tampa and Dallas and blame to to Pro-Castro sympathizers and FPCC members like Oswald and Gilberto Policarpo Lopez. I believe that Policarpo Lopez was the short blond 5'6" that impersonated Oswald in Mexico to show that the Cubans were conspiring with Oswald to kill JFK. Possibly Miguel Casas Saez was the one to take the blame in Chicago. Later Angleton will blame Cuba and claim that Saez Oswald and Lopez killed JFK.
The US army and the Intelligence had informed JFK that Castro had warned USA that he might retaliate if they did not stop the attempts against him.
So they pursuaded Kennedy that a Continuation of Government exercise should take place to ensure that the Gonvernment will still function even if the President was attacked.
That's why the National Emergency Airplane (Doomsday Plane) was above Dallas at 12.30 pm. This would also explain the presence of Jack Crichton in the motorcade.
In this exercise the WHCA was also involved to control communications.
So the day that a COG exercise that involved a fake assassination attempt to be blamed on Castro, coupled with a security stripping someone hijacked it and murdered JFK. They were all acessories to murder after the fact, and feeling guilty as hell. So most of them did not need to know about the plot to be part of it.

[Phil Dragoo]

[TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD]Vince Palamara[/TD]
[TD] 3:41pm Aug 15[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Phil- that was a general theory of mine to try to attempt to give what looks like sinister behavior on the part of the agents an "out"; don't live or die by this or any other theory, per se. PLEASE post that previous sentence AND this link at the forum: [URL="http://www.facebook.com/l/6AQE8is-oAQGcbd2c9G2PieKllKffXQDpynNcl7Iix4M5RA/henryrybkadonlawtonjfksecretservice.blogspot.com/"]http://www.facebook.com/l/6AQE8is-oAQGcbd2c9G2PieKllKffXQDpynNcl7Iix4M5RA/henryrybkadonlawtonjfksecretservice.blogspot.com/

[/URL][TABLE="width: 100%"]
[TR]
[TD]Vince Palamara[/TD]
[TD] 3:42pm Aug 15[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Also- everyone who is still clueless, 5+ years later, needs to see my review (s) for Doug Horne's great book (s) at Amazon-I explain my brief waver and so forth. I was burned out at the time and ripe for the picking...AND my work holds up, Oswald or no Oswald



[URL="http://www.facebook.com/l/6AQE8is-oAQGcbd2c9G2PieKllKffXQDpynNcl7Iix4M5RA/henryrybkadonlawtonjfksecretservice.blogspot.com/"]
[/URL]

[Seamus Coogan]

Excellent summation Phil lad precisely as I thought!

[Phil Dragoo]

In one of Vince Palamara blog articles on the general topic (that pdf, I think) he mentioned Abraham Bolden approved his work but didn't go along with the security-stripping test.

We can't know what was said in secret by Secret Service officers in charge to agents who were eager to obey, to fulfill their oath and responsibility.

I was offered a copy of the Blain book today for free and declined as I couldn't conjure a timely manner of jamming it up his ass.

Can the American people for one second give the Secret Service hookers-in-Rio scandal a rest and consider an Elmer Moore who called the president a traitor, an Emery Roberts who ordered agents to not protect the president, a James Greer who stomped on the brakes so hard 59 witnesses said the limo nearly stopped, a Ray Kellerman who sat chatting distance from the man he was sworn to protect as the lead accumulated.

The coverup of the Secret Service imposter behind the fence--behind the fence.

They knew enough to plant Barker with phony ID behind the fence.

And Bowers ran into a bridge abutment.

The hulking mass is the biggest duh.

Kennedy was the Inconvenient Truth.

All these pygmies today scuttle bent over never daring to complain the ceiling is four feet high.

The permanent castrati of the media are thus the shrill neurotics we behold and suffer.

But it was all a great test of what shit Americans would swallow.

The oceans are not too much.

Further this deponent sayeth not.