|
|
 August 25, 2010, 05:33:17 PM
|
Sr. Member
Posts: 446
|
He testified that he encountered a "secret service agent" on the GK immediatley after the shooting. My question is what category of witness do we place him in - attention-seeker or liar? Thanks.
{Hangs up and listens}
-------------------------
|
|
|
 Reply |
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010, 08:26:22 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 8302
|
Quote by Rob Caprio:But this still not explain why he (Rybka) tried to get on the back of the limo, now does it. NOR does it explain why he was demoted from limo driver to airplane watcher in one day. Rob, why do you make the ridiculous claim that Rybka "tried to get on the back of the limo"? When one watches the video footage, it is very clear that Rybka never makes an attempt to get on the back of the limo. His goal was to get to the limo. Whether that would have meant on the back or in the driver's seat we won't know, but we do know he was called off and told to stay at the airport. Why? No one told him anything. That's why he raised his hands in confusion. He was already walking NEXT to the limo, like Clint Hill. If his assigned spot was on the back bumper he would have been standing on it. But no one was assigned that day to stand on the back bumper. Clint Hill was able to easily follow the plan and jump on the running board of the SS car. Rybka was supposed to do the same thing on his side, but some klutz was already standing where he needed to go. Absolutely 100% incorrect. First of all, agents were never assigned to the back bumper of the President's limo. Therefore, the fact that no one was assigned to the back of the limo on 11/22/63 means absolutely nothing. Agent Ready was assigned to Kennedy just like Agent Hill was assigned to Jackie. Ready is one of the two agents who you claim was "in the way" of Rybka being able to get onto the Queen Mary. I believe your word was "klutz". But you're wrong. Neither was in the way of Rybka. Rybka did not get on the follow-up car because he was never supposed to. He clearly never made an attempt to hop on the follow-up car so how could you claim that a klutz was in his way, preventing him from doing so? Not quite 100%. Agents were sometimes assigned to ride the back bumper in earlier motorcades. The JFK said stop it. Rybka was supposed to jump onto the SS car running board just as Clint Hill did. "The(n) JFK said stop it." Of course we are still waiting for a cite for this claim. I asked some time ago for one.
-------------------------
-------------------------
A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
"Benavides- Saw Oswald kill Tippit, picked him out of a lineup." - Brian "Doesn't Know His Rear From His Back" Walker
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010, 09:30:08 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 9042
|
Rob, why are you making the silly claim that Rybka was acting like he was supposed to go to the limo? Ah, because he was moving to the limo and NOT boarding AF!???The film clearly shows that Rybka never made an attempt to get onto the back of the Presidential limo. Therefore, to claim that Rybka attempted to do so is proof that one is not using logic and common sense and is, instead, looking for sinister happenings when in actuality there is nothing sinister going on, whatsoever. As I have very clearly explained already, Rybka was to secure the limo while at Love Field. And as I have said quite clearly before, I am NOT here for your explanations, but rather evidence. Why can't you cite a duty roster pre-11/22/63 showing us AF1 was his duty station on 11/22/63 when they got to Dallas?I already know the situation. You are the one who is misguided. Don't believe me if you don't want to. If you feel the need to search for a duty roster, feel free. Once the limo left for the streets of Dallas, Rybka was then to secure Air Force One. This also is exactly what is seen in the footage. He never makes an attempt to hop onto the Presidential limo. Why did you claim the did make an attempt to do so? Meanwhile he keeps claiming his duty station was on AF1 when Rybka gave no indication of heading there in the film, but we do see him making a move towards a car. Why can't you cite the official duty roster for us Bill?How do we know that Rybka didn't do so (head over to secure Air Force One) within minutes of disappearing from the film? He clearly stated so in his report. He clearly says "From this point I returned to the immediate area of Air Force One." Also.....No, we do not see him "making moves to a car". Sheesh, what kind of goggles are those, anyway? The confusion was on the part of the other agents who were already on the follow-up car. They mistakenly assumed that Rybka was to join them. Rybka, however, knew that he was to return to the plane. This does not explain his confusion over the issue. IF he knew he was supposed to stay with AF1 why did he look so frustrated?As has been explained to you several times now, Rybka was not confused. Why are you assuming that he was confused? Oh, that's right! The goggles! Through them, you see Rybka raise his hands in the air 3 times and mistakenly assume that he is confused. Rob, take off the conspiracy goggles! Bill, put on your whatever that allows you to cite. Why can't you ever cite anything?Did you not see the report posted by Duncan earlier in this thread? In it, Rybka clearly explains his duties. You can ignore that if you want. Up to you. You can also claim that we don't know for sure that he wasn't "forced" to sign that report. But, that would require putting on those goggles again. Quote by Rob Caprio:You can't show he (Rybka) was not forced to sign it (Duty Assignment Report) either. You're right Rob, I cannot prove that Rybka signed that Duty Report under his own free will. 
-------------------------
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 30, 2010, 09:40:44 PM by Bill Brown »
|
-------------------------
"The TRUTH doesn't require anyone's belief." - Dale Myers
"The human mind craves a mystery more than it loves the truth." - Dan Rather
"Reason does not always appeal to unreasonable men." - John F. Kennedy
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
October 01, 2010, 05:11:46 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 8302
|
Rob, why are you making the silly claim that Rybka was acting like he was supposed to go to the limo? Ah, because he was moving to the limo and NOT boarding AF!??? The film clearly shows that Rybka never made an attempt to get onto the back of the Presidential limo. Therefore, to claim that Rybka attempted to do so is proof that one is not using logic and common sense and is, instead, looking for sinister happenings when in actuality there is nothing sinister going on, whatsoever. Where is my comment that he was attempting to get on the back of the car? Why are you always changing what the other person said? I said he was MOVING TOWARDS THE CAR WHEN HE WAS CALLED BACK! I have also said some researchers feel he was going to stand on the right rear bumper and Hill was going to stand on the left rear bumper area, but I NEVER said they were. I merely said he thought his assignment was for either the limo or the Queen Mary.As I have very clearly explained already, Rybka was to secure the limo while at Love Field. And as I have said quite clearly before, I am NOT here for your explanations, but rather evidence. Why can't you cite a duty roster pre-11/22/63 showing us AF1 was his duty station on 11/22/63 when they got to Dallas? I already know the situation. You are the one who is misguided. Don't believe me if you don't want to. If you feel the need to search for a duty roster, feel free. This means Bill can't find one to show us! This means he is offering us HIS OPINION again! For those of you here for Bill's opinion this is great, but for those of us who want the truth via evidence we are out of luck I guess. At least we know where we stand now, don't we? I love how I am "misguided" when he can't even support his claims with evidence!Once the limo left for the streets of Dallas, Rybka was then to secure Air Force One. This also is exactly what is seen in the footage. He never makes an attempt to hop onto the Presidential limo. Why did you claim the did make an attempt to do so? Meanwhile he keeps claiming his duty station was on AF1 when Rybka gave no indication of heading there in the film, but we do see him making a move towards a car. Why can't you cite the official duty roster for us Bill? How do we know that Rybka didn't do so (head over to secure Air Force One) within minutes of disappearing from the film? He clearly stated so in his report. He clearly says "From this point I returned to the immediate area of Air Force One." Also.....No, we do not see him "making moves to a car". Sheesh, what kind of goggles are those, anyway? Still no duty roster, just more speculation! Even IF he did do this, it does NOT wipe out the fact he was moving toward the limo or Queen Mary FIRST!  YOU obviously have BLINDERS on!The confusion was on the part of the other agents who were already on the follow-up car. They mistakenly assumed that Rybka was to join them. Rybka, however, knew that he was to return to the plane. This does not explain his confusion over the issue. IF he knew he was supposed to stay with AF1 why did he look so frustrated? As has been explained to you several times now, Rybka was not confused. Why are you assuming that he was confused? Oh, that's right! The goggles! Through them, you see Rybka raise his hands in the air 3 times and mistakenly assume that he is confused. I guess it is normal to throw your hands up multiple times for no reason in Bill's world, huh? Why did he look so perplexed IF he knew his duty station was AF1 Bill?Rob, take off the conspiracy goggles! Bill, put on your whatever that allows you to cite. Why can't you ever cite anything? Did you not see the report posted by Duncan earlier in this thread? In it, Rybka clearly explains his duties. You can ignore that if you want. Up to you. You can also claim that we don't know for sure that he wasn't "forced" to sign that report. But, that would require putting on those goggles again. First of all the comment was ABOUT YOU CITING, not Duncan, and secondly, as stated earlier that does not solve the issue, now does it. ONLY a duty roster pre-11/22/63 could do this, but you seem all out of those.LOL! So using a report that was written up AFTER the assassination is better than simply using the duty roster that was done BEFOREthe assassination to you? How enlightening this comment is. Quote by Rob Caprio: Quote You can't show he (Rybka) was not forced to sign it (Duty Assignment Report) either. You're right Rob, I cannot prove that Rybka signed that Duty Report under his own free will. rofl And yet the guy laughs!! What kind of person admits they can't prove anything, but then laughs at someone else's explanation? From my experience, a very dishonest one!
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 01, 2010, 08:11:10 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 8302
|
Rob, in your above post, could you please put all of your comments in red, not just your new comments? I don't want someone to see your post above and think that I said some of the silly things that you did. Thanks.
When you do this, I'll respond.
This is what happens when they can't cite! They play games instead. I'll try to get around to it soon Bill, perhaps in the mean time you can cite the duty roster that was drawn up BEFORE 11/22/63 FOR US?
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
October 01, 2010, 08:13:45 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 8302
|
Rob, why are you making the silly claim that Rybka was acting like he was supposed to go to the limo? Ah, because he was moving to the limo and NOT boarding AF!???The film clearly shows that Rybka never made an attempt to get onto the back of the Presidential limo. Therefore, to claim that Rybka attempted to do so is proof that one is not using logic and common sense and is, instead, looking for sinister happenings when in actuality there is nothing sinister going on, whatsoever. Where is my comment that he was attempting to get on the back of the car? Why are you always changing what the other person said? I said he was MOVING TOWARDS THE CAR WHEN HE WAS CALLED BACK! I have also said some researchers feel he was going to stand on the right rear bumper and Hill was going to stand on the left rear bumper area, but I NEVER said they were. I merely said he thought his assignment was for either the limo or the Queen Mary.As I have very clearly explained already, Rybka was to secure the limo while at Love Field. And as I have said quite clearly before, I am NOT here for your explanations, but rather evidence. Why can't you cite a duty roster pre-11/22/63 showing us AF1 was his duty station on 11/22/63 when they got to Dallas?I already know the situation. You are the one who is misguided. Don't believe me if you don't want to. If you feel the need to search for a duty roster, feel free. This means Bill can't find one to show us! This means he is offering us HIS OPINION again! For those of you here for Bill's opinion this is great, but for those of us who want the truth via evidence we are out of luck I guess. At least we know where we stand now, don't we? I love how I am "misguided" when he can't even support his claims with evidence!Once the limo left for the streets of Dallas, Rybka was then to secure Air Force One. This also is exactly what is seen in the footage. He never makes an attempt to hop onto the Presidential limo. Why did you claim the did make an attempt to do so? Meanwhile he keeps claiming his duty station was on AF1 when Rybka gave no indication of heading there in the film, but we do see him making a move towards a car. Why can't you cite the official duty roster for us Bill?How do we know that Rybka didn't do so (head over to secure Air Force One) within minutes of disappearing from the film? He clearly stated so in his report. He clearly says "From this point I returned to the immediate area of Air Force One." Also.....No, we do not see him "making moves to a car". Sheesh, what kind of goggles are those, anyway? Still no duty roster, just more speculation! Even IF he did do this, it does NOT wipe out the fact he was moving toward the limo or Queen Mary FIRST! YOU obviously have BLINDERS on!The confusion was on the part of the other agents who were already on the follow-up car. They mistakenly assumed that Rybka was to join them. Rybka, however, knew that he was to return to the plane. This does not explain his confusion over the issue. IF he knew he was supposed to stay with AF1 why did he look so frustrated?As has been explained to you several times now, Rybka was not confused. Why are you assuming that he was confused? Oh, that's right! The goggles! Through them, you see Rybka raise his hands in the air 3 times and mistakenly assume that he is confused. I guess it is normal to throw your hands up multiple times for no reason in Bill's world, huh? Why did he look so perplexed IF he knew his duty station was AF1 Bill?Rob, take off the conspiracy goggles! Bill, put on your whatever that allows you to cite. Why can't you ever cite anything?Did you not see the report posted by Duncan earlier in this thread? In it, Rybka clearly explains his duties. You can ignore that if you want. Up to you. You can also claim that we don't know for sure that he wasn't "forced" to sign that report. But, that would require putting on those goggles again. First of all the comment was ABOUT YOU CITING, not Duncan, and secondly, as stated earlier that does not solve the issue, now does it. ONLY a duty roster pre-11/22/63 could do this, but you seem all out of those.LOL! So using a report that was written up AFTER the assassination is better than simply using the duty roster that was done BEFOREthe assassination to you? How enlightening this comment is. Quote by Rob Caprio: Quote You can't show he (Rybka) was not forced to sign it (Duty Assignment Report) either. You're right Rob, I cannot prove that Rybka signed that Duty Report under his own free will. rofl And yet the guy laughs!! What kind of person admits they can't prove anything, but then laughs at someone else's explanation? From my experience, a very dishonest one!Happy now? Like you couldn't have done this yourself! I think Bill is running since he can't cite the duty roster to support his claim.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 04, 2010, 05:51:27 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 8302
|
Yes, I'm happy now. But I won't respond until you delete the previous post, where others could easily be confused as to who said what.
I think we have our answer folks. We can see Bill just says things with no ability to support them. That is okay as he is allowed to do this, but now we know we shouldn't put too much credence on what he says if he can't support it. He claims Rybka was supposed to guard AF1 on 11/22/63 in Dallas, but he can't show one piece of evidence dated prior to 11/22/63 that shows this is the correct version of events.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
|
