3 ms·

The problem is, the Secret Service could see that too, and Dallas wasn't exactly a "friendly" city. The decision to take such a route in a vehicle without co

The problem is, the Secret Service could see that too, and Dallas wasn't exactly a "friendly" city. The decision to take such a route in a vehicle without cover or without securing the building remains unexplained. So, yea, the depository is a perfect location to shoot onto that route. This in and of itself is a massive problem.

ianburrell 3y ago
Oswald was temporary employee at the Book Depository. He carried a long package into the building in the morning. I don't think there was security since would have likely searched the package. But his employee status would have gotten him in and given him reason to be there in any search.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
kevinmchugh 3y ago
The featured article is about a 23 year old secret service agent hired directly from college and quickly assigned to protect the first lady - what if the secret service before 1963 was just not that competent? How much does that explain for us?
jmyeet 3y ago
You, like many people, fall into the trap of seeing the events of 1963 through a modern lens, a lens that itself was greatly influenced by these events. Presidential security in 1963 wasn't what it is today. For example, JFK would stop his car to go mingle with the crowd. There's a photo on this audio recording from Miami in 1963 [1]. There are parallels with 9/11. Prior to 9-11, people would generally go along peacefully with hijackers. Why? Because they knew the "routine". The hijackers would fly the plane somewhere, land it, make demands, make noise for their political cause and, more often than not, people would get to go home. Harrowing for sure. But the general public didn't conceive of planes being used as cruise missiles. We all know post-9/11 was so much security theater but it was also largely unnecessary because people were now aware they could be used as a missile so were less likely to simply go along with demands. JFK's assassination changed the threat modelling and protection by the Secret Service of the president. In spite of that, Ronald Reagan was shot by an assailant [2] without any great planning or mass conspiracy. Now it's all bulletproof motorcades with armor plating to survive running over a land mine. It's Secret Service vetting every audience member at a live event. It's mapping out and securing any potential sniper positions. None of that was true to the same degree in 1963. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ep_NiYKrcC0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ep_NiYKrcC0 [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Ronald_Reagan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Ron...

ianburrell 3y ago

Oswald was temporary employee at the Book Depository. He carried a long package into the building in the morning. I don't think there was security since would have likely searched the package. But his employee status would have gotten him in and given him reason to be there in any search.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

kevinmchugh 3y ago

The featured article is about a 23 year old secret service agent hired directly from college and quickly assigned to protect the first lady - what if the secret service before 1963 was just not that competent? How much does that explain for us?

jmyeet 3y ago

You, like many people, fall into the trap of seeing the events of 1963 through a modern lens, a lens that itself was greatly influenced by these events. Presidential security in 1963 wasn't what it is today. For example, JFK would stop his car to go mingle with the crowd. There's a photo on this audio recording from Miami in 1963 [1]. There are parallels with 9/11. Prior to 9-11, people would generally go along peacefully with hijackers. Why? Because they knew the "routine". The hijackers would fly the plane somewhere, land it, make demands, make noise for their political cause and, more often than not, people would get to go home. Harrowing for sure. But the general public didn't conceive of planes being used as cruise missiles. We all know post-9/11 was so much security theater but it was also largely unnecessary because people were now aware they could be used as a missile so were less likely to simply go along with demands. JFK's assassination changed the threat modelling and protection by the Secret Service of the president. In spite of that, Ronald Reagan was shot by an assailant [2] without any great planning or mass conspiracy. Now it's all bulletproof motorcades with armor plating to survive running over a land mine. It's Secret Service vetting every audience member at a live event. It's mapping out and securing any potential sniper positions. None of that was true to the same degree in 1963. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ep_NiYKrcC0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ep_NiYKrcC0 [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Ronald_Reagan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Ron...