Post by Rob Caprio on Mar 23, 2019 22:25:52 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
alchetron.com/cdn/james-joseph-rowley-adb5dfdd-535a-42d9-8e1b-d78ad233619-resize-750.jpg
Why did what James Rowley write in Commission Exhibit (CE) 1021 NOT correspond to what we see in CE 760?
If we go back to CE-1021 and look on page 706 (page three in the document) we will see the following question and answer.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/pages/WH_Vol18_0360b.gif
Question
c. According to the December 18 report, the FBI office in Dallas gave the local Secret Service the name of a possibly dangerous individual in the Dallas area, and the Dallas Secret Service office also conducted an investigation of persons connected with the disturbance during Ambassador Stevenson’s recent visit to Dallas, and obtained the photographs of some of these individuals. Were the names of these persons ADDED to the PRS files before or after the Dallas trip? [My note: What good would this do AFTER the trip?]
Answer:
The names of these individuals referred to the Dallas office and investigated by them were added to the Protective Research Section files as soon as reports were received on these in Protective Research. The INDIVIDUAL, whose name was furnished to us by the FBI and the Dallas Police, was investigated by Dallas office of the Secret Service prior to the Dallas trip. The subject was interviewed and a report had been submitted to PRS on November 13, 1963.
The anti-Stevenson pickets were identified, and available photos were in the hands of security personnel at the Trade Mart. These names were added to the PRS files after the trip. (Emphasis mine) (CE 1021, p. 3 in original)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0360b.htm
Quote off
So we see the local SS office investigated the name given to them by the FBI BEFORE the trip per this document done by James Rowley, but if we go to CE 760 we something different. CE 760 was done by SAIC Bouck (PRS) and on page 530 we see the following comment by him:
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0278b.gif
On or about November 8, 1963, PRS was officially notified of the itinerary for the proposed trip of President Kennedy and Vice President Johnson to Texas.
A clerical employee of this office immediately checked the trip index file for PRS SUBJECTS OF CONCERN in relation to the Texas trip. NO CARDS WERE FOUND in the file that would indicate the presence of any known seriously dangerous PRS subjects as residing in the Dallas area, nor in any other in Texas where stops were scheduled except for Houston.
On November 14, 1963, the above indicated clerical employee prepared an office memorandum advising the name of one PRS subject who had previously been referred to the interested offices and was still of concern, and furnishing identifying data on a NEW PRS subject who had not previously been included in the alert. (Emphasis mine) (CE 706, p. 530)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0278b.htm
Quote off
We see initially when the trip itinerary was announced the PRS officer found NO cards for anyone dangerous in the Dallas area. Then, on November 14, 1963 (the day after the interview with the person mentioned by Rowley was submitted) we see the same clerical employee prepared an office memo outlining this person. We can safely assume this is the person Rowley mentioned as it says, “subject who had been previously referred” and we know this person was given to the SS by the FBI. Could this be LHO? We don’t know, but so far so good. Then we come to the comment about a NEW PRS subject who had NOT been previously included in the alert! Who was this? Why did Rowley NOT mention this to the WC in CE-1021? No mention of this is made as the only other issue covered in Rowley’s answer is regarding the anti-Stevenson picketers.
Who was this person and what threat did they pose to JFK?
alchetron.com/cdn/james-joseph-rowley-adb5dfdd-535a-42d9-8e1b-d78ad233619-resize-750.jpg
Why did what James Rowley write in Commission Exhibit (CE) 1021 NOT correspond to what we see in CE 760?
If we go back to CE-1021 and look on page 706 (page three in the document) we will see the following question and answer.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/pages/WH_Vol18_0360b.gif
Question
c. According to the December 18 report, the FBI office in Dallas gave the local Secret Service the name of a possibly dangerous individual in the Dallas area, and the Dallas Secret Service office also conducted an investigation of persons connected with the disturbance during Ambassador Stevenson’s recent visit to Dallas, and obtained the photographs of some of these individuals. Were the names of these persons ADDED to the PRS files before or after the Dallas trip? [My note: What good would this do AFTER the trip?]
Answer:
The names of these individuals referred to the Dallas office and investigated by them were added to the Protective Research Section files as soon as reports were received on these in Protective Research. The INDIVIDUAL, whose name was furnished to us by the FBI and the Dallas Police, was investigated by Dallas office of the Secret Service prior to the Dallas trip. The subject was interviewed and a report had been submitted to PRS on November 13, 1963.
The anti-Stevenson pickets were identified, and available photos were in the hands of security personnel at the Trade Mart. These names were added to the PRS files after the trip. (Emphasis mine) (CE 1021, p. 3 in original)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0360b.htm
Quote off
So we see the local SS office investigated the name given to them by the FBI BEFORE the trip per this document done by James Rowley, but if we go to CE 760 we something different. CE 760 was done by SAIC Bouck (PRS) and on page 530 we see the following comment by him:
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0278b.gif
On or about November 8, 1963, PRS was officially notified of the itinerary for the proposed trip of President Kennedy and Vice President Johnson to Texas.
A clerical employee of this office immediately checked the trip index file for PRS SUBJECTS OF CONCERN in relation to the Texas trip. NO CARDS WERE FOUND in the file that would indicate the presence of any known seriously dangerous PRS subjects as residing in the Dallas area, nor in any other in Texas where stops were scheduled except for Houston.
On November 14, 1963, the above indicated clerical employee prepared an office memorandum advising the name of one PRS subject who had previously been referred to the interested offices and was still of concern, and furnishing identifying data on a NEW PRS subject who had not previously been included in the alert. (Emphasis mine) (CE 706, p. 530)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0278b.htm
Quote off
We see initially when the trip itinerary was announced the PRS officer found NO cards for anyone dangerous in the Dallas area. Then, on November 14, 1963 (the day after the interview with the person mentioned by Rowley was submitted) we see the same clerical employee prepared an office memo outlining this person. We can safely assume this is the person Rowley mentioned as it says, “subject who had been previously referred” and we know this person was given to the SS by the FBI. Could this be LHO? We don’t know, but so far so good. Then we come to the comment about a NEW PRS subject who had NOT been previously included in the alert! Who was this? Why did Rowley NOT mention this to the WC in CE-1021? No mention of this is made as the only other issue covered in Rowley’s answer is regarding the anti-Stevenson picketers.
Who was this person and what threat did they pose to JFK?