Anthony Summers

[Marc Ellis]

Don't get me wrong, I have not spent a lot of time on McAdams' site. Last night I went there to cross-check the bit about where Ruby came up with the 'I did it for Jackie' story.

IMO, McAdams does a bit better with that than he does with his pathetic 544 Camp Street theory. But like much of his material, it is ultimately a red herring.

Even if it is true Ruby told Sorrels he did it for Jackie - before he claimed his lawyer came up with the idea (and I'm not saying it is true) - that does not rule out the possibility that Ruby actually did it for the mob.

Simply because Ruby said one thing does not make it true. And where there is a contradiction in the documentary evidence, as there is on that point, you have to look to extrinsic evidence. Ruby's mob ties, phone calls immediately prior to the event, his financial situation, his hanging around the police station with a gun for two days and the whole mystery of how he managed to be present at the transfer, tell me this was no spur of the moment crime of passion.

Thus far, I think Summers has done a pretty good job on the Jack Ruby part of his book.

[David Josephs]

Don't get me wrong, I have not spent a lot of time on McAdams' site. Last night I went there to cross-check the bit about where Ruby came up with the 'I did it for Jackie' story.

IMO, McAdams does a bit better with that than he does with his pathetic 544 Camp Street theory. But like much of his material, it is ultimately a red herring.

Even if it is true Ruby told Sorrels he did it for Jackie - before he claimed his lawyer came up with the idea (and I'm not saying it is true) - that does not rule out the possibility that Ruby actually did it for the mob.

Simply because Ruby said one thing does not make it true. And where there is a contradiction in the documentary evidence, as there is on that point, you have to look to extrinsic evidence. Ruby's mob ties, phone calls immediately prior to the event, his financial situation, his hanging around the police station with a gun for two days and the whole mystery of how he managed to be present at the transfer, tell me this was no spur of the moment crime of passion.

Thus far, I think Summers has done a pretty good job on the Jack Ruby part of his book.

What really bothers us is that MOST people searching the web will come across that site in the first page of results... while there is no definitive GO-TO site for them to learn about the conspiracy...
Even if you add "conspiracy" his site comes up after the WIKI CT discussion.

Seems to me we need a site that does a good job at presenting the counter...

whokilledjfk.com
jfkmurdersolved.com
and a host of forums are there... but even they make it very hard to follow "our" understanding of the conspiracy....


I feel lucky that I have Summer's original book... but feel that most of us are well within our capabilities to review the evidence ourselves (maryferrell.org, history-matters.com, AARClibrary.org)
and come to our own conclusions... after 5-10 years of study and analysis... (what I know know compared to 10 years ago is staggering... the greatest advice is to accept the conspiracy but do not form conclusions until you understand more of what the conpiracy entailed...

It's HARD WORK compared to "Oh, Oswald did it? OK" and back to our comfy lives.
and the deeper you go the uglier the people and the crimes get....

I'd suggest that the truth is told by those with the least to gain.... and by those who gained the least or much worse.

Jack Ruby or any Mafia member does not qualify.
Career CIA/Military/SS - need not apply.

EVERYONE knows Specter... anyone remember Redlich?

Cheers
DJ

April27, 1964

MEMORANDUM

TO: J. Lee Rankin

FROM: Norman Redlich


The purpose of this memorandum is toexplain the reasons why
certainmembers of the staff feel that it is important to take certain
on-sitephotographs in connection with the location of the approximate
pointsat which the three bullets struck the occupants of the
Presidentiallimousine.

Our report presumably will state that the President was hit by
thefirst bullet, Governor Connally by the second, and the President
bythe third and fatal bullet. The report willalso conclude that the
bullets werefired by one person located in the sixth floor southeast
cornerwindow of the TSBD building.

As our investigation now stands,however, we have not shown
that theseevents could possibly have occurred in the manner suggested
above. All we have is a reasonable hypothesis whichappears to be
supportedby the medical testimony but which has not been checked out
againstthe physical facts at the scene of the assassination.

Our examination of the Zapruder filmsshows that the fatal
thirdshot struck the President at a point which we can locate with
reasonableaccuracy on the ground. We can do thisbecause we know the
exactframe (no. 313) in the film at which the third shot hit the
Presidentand we know the location of the photographer. By lining up
fixedobjects in the movie frame where this shot occurs we feel that
wehave determined the approximate location of this shot. This can be
verifiedby a photo of the same spot from the point where Zapruder was
standing.

We have the testimony of Governor andMrs. Connally that the
Governorwas hit with the second bullet at a point which we probably
cannotfix with precision. We feel we haveestablished, however, with
thehelp of medical testimony, that the shot which hit the Governor
didnot come after frame 240 on the Zapruder film. The governor feels
thatit came around 230, which is certainly consistent with our
observationsof the film and with the doctor's testimony. Since the
Presidentwas shot at frame 313, this would leave a time of at least 4
secondsbetween the two shots, certainly ample for even an
inexperiencedmarksman.

Prior to our last viewing of the filmswith Governor Connally
wehad assumed that the President was hit while he was concealed
behindthe sign which occurs between frames 215-225. We have expert
testimonyto the effect that a skilled marksman would require a
minimum2 seconds between shots with this rifle. Since the camera
operatesat 18 1/3 frames per second, there would have to be a minimum
of40 frames between shots. It is apparent,therefore, that if
GovernorConnally was even as late as frame 240, the President would
haveto have been hit no later than frame 190 and probably even
earlier.

We have not yet examined the assassination scene to determine
whether theassassin in fact could have shot the President prior to
frame 190. We could locate the position on the groundwhich
correspondsto this frame and it would then be our intent to establish
byphotography that the assassin would have fired the first shot at the
Presidentprior to this point. Our intention is not to establishthe
point with completeaccuracy, but merely to substantiate the
hypothesiswhich underlies the conclusions thatOswald was the sole
assassin.

I had always assumed that our finalreport would be
accompaniedby a surveyor's diagram which would indicate the
approximatelocation of the three shots. We certainly cannot prepare
such a diagram withoutestablishing that we are describing an
occurrence which isphysically possible. Our failure to do this will,
inmy opinion, place this Report in jeopardy since it is a certainty
thatothers will examine the Zapruder films and raise the same
questionswhich have been raised by our examination of the films. If
wedo not attempt to answer these observable facts, others may answer
themwith facts which challenge our most basic assumptions, or with
fancifultheories based on our unwillingness to test our assumptions
bythe investigatory methods available to us.

I should add that the facts which we now have in our
possession,submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and
SecretService, are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected, will
present acompletely misleading picture.

It may well be that this project should be undertaken by the
FBI and Secret Servicewith our assistance instead of being done as a
staff project. The important thing is that the project beundertaken
expeditiously.

[Marc Ellis]

I finished Summers' book. Except for the Mexico City section, I thought it was a good read, especially the parts on Oswald in the TSBD, the mob & RFK's war on them and the part about Ruby.

I'll probably spend some more time with it. I want to go over his take on Oswald in the TSBD again.
Then I may re-read Destiny Betrayed again.

The Edwin Walker episode is interesting me now. Did Oswald do that? If yes - was there an accomplice? If yes - who was that accomplice?

It makes no sense for an anti-Castro Cuban to attempt to assassinate an anti-Castro American general.
That's what has me wondering.

A Traficante associate named John Martino is quoted by Summers:

"The anti-Castro people put Oswald together. Oswald didn't know who he was working forhe was just ignorant of who was really putting him together. Oswald was to meet his contact at "the Texas Theater [the movie house where Oswald was arrested]. They were to meet Oswald in the theater and get him out of the country, then eliminate him. Oswald made a mistake… . There was no way we could get to him. They had Ruby kill him." --
Excerpt From: Summers, Anthony. "Not in Your Lifetime." Open Road Integrated Media, 2013-09-06. iBooks. This material may be protected by copyright.


Check out this book on the iBookstore: https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/not-in-...6933?mt=11 "
--
How do you fit the attempted assassination of Edwin Walker into Oswald being 'put together' by anti-Castro people?

[Dawn Meredith]

I finished Summers' book. Except for the Mexico City section, I thought it was a good read, especially the parts on Oswald in the TSBD, the mob & RFK's war on them and the part about Ruby.

I'll probably spend some more time with it. I want to go over his take on Oswald in the TSBD again.
Then I may re-read Destiny Betrayed again.

The Edwin Walker episode is interesting me now. Did Oswald do that? If yes - was there an accomplice? If yes - who was that accomplice?

It makes no sense for an anti-Castro Cuban to attempt to assassinate an anti-Castro American general.
That's what has me wondering.

A Traficante associate named John Martino is quoted by Summers:

"The anti-Castro people put Oswald together. Oswald didn't know who he was working forhe was just ignorant of who was really putting him together. Oswald was to meet his contact at "the Texas Theater [the movie house where Oswald was arrested]. They were to meet Oswald in the theater and get him out of the country, then eliminate him. Oswald made a mistake… . There was no way we could get to him. They had Ruby kill him." --
Excerpt From: Summers, Anthony. "Not in Your Lifetime." Open Road Integrated Media, 2013-09-06. iBooks. This material may be protected by copyright.


Check out this book on the iBookstore: https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/not-in-...6933?mt=11 "
--
How do you fit the attempted assassination of Edwin Walker into Oswald being 'put together' by anti-Castro people?

NO!!! Oswald did not "do that". (groan)

Dawn

[Marc Ellis]

I finished Summers' book. Except for the Mexico City section, I thought it was a good read, especially the parts on Oswald in the TSBD, the mob & RFK's war on them and the part about Ruby.

I'll probably spend some more time with it. I want to go over his take on Oswald in the TSBD again.
Then I may re-read Destiny Betrayed again.

The Edwin Walker episode is interesting me now. Did Oswald do that? If yes - was there an accomplice? If yes - who was that accomplice?

It makes no sense for an anti-Castro Cuban to attempt to assassinate an anti-Castro American general.
That's what has me wondering.

A Traficante associate named John Martino is quoted by Summers:

"The anti-Castro people put Oswald together. Oswald didn't know who he was working forhe was just ignorant of who was really putting him together. Oswald was to meet his contact at "the Texas Theater [the movie house where Oswald was arrested]. They were to meet Oswald in the theater and get him out of the country, then eliminate him. Oswald made a mistake… . There was no way we could get to him. They had Ruby kill him." --
Excerpt From: Summers, Anthony. "Not in Your Lifetime." Open Road Integrated Media, 2013-09-06. iBooks. This material may be protected by copyright.


Check out this book on the iBookstore: https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/not-in-...6933?mt=11 "
--
How do you fit the attempted assassination of Edwin Walker into Oswald being 'put together' by anti-Castro people?

NO!!! Oswald did not "do that". (groan)

Dawn

Thanks. That at least makes sense.

[Don Jeffries]

Marc,

Remember, the allegation that Oswald shot at Walker comes exclusively from Marina. Despite this, much of the research community now believes Oswald was the shooter. There is no "evidence" that connects Oswald to the shooting, outside of the fact that Marina said he did it. Oswald didn't shoot JFK, he didn't shoot Tippit, and he didn't attempt to shoot Walker.

[Vasilios Vazakas]

Marc

While discussing Summer's book you refer to Destiny Betrayed and McAdams site.
Now, someone who does not know much about the research community might think
that Summers, McAdams and DiEugenio have the same value, that they are of equal importance.
Which clearly is not the case. McAdams is a waste of time and you have to listen to the experienced
members of this site and stop reading him, is full of disinfo. If you want to learn more about McAdams
visit http://www.ctka.net/2013/mcadams.html and http://www.ctka.net/2013/mcadams_2.html.
So if you want to learn more about the JFK assassination drop McAdams, Summers book is nothing great either (apart what is based in Bill Kelly's work which is good) and read some good books. I can propose some of them which is i have read. There are other great books which i have not read. You have already read Destiny Betrayed, so:
Reclaiming Parkland
Oswald and the CIA by John Newman
JFK and Vietnam by John Newman
A Certain Arrogance by G.M. Evica
Deep Politics I & II by Peter Dale Scott
The Man who Knew too Much by Dick Russell
Harvey and Lee by John Armostrong
Battling Wall Street by Donald Gibson
A Breach of Trust by Gerald McKnight
JFK and the Unspeakable by Jim Douglass
The Last Investigation by Gaeton Fonzi

[Albert Doyle]

"The anti-Castro people put Oswald together. Oswald didn't know who he was working forhe was just ignorant of who was really putting him together. Oswald was to meet his contact at "the Texas Theater [the movie house where Oswald was arrested]. They were to meet Oswald in the theater and get him out of the country, then eliminate him. Oswald made a mistake… . There was no way we could get to him. They had Ruby kill him." --

Perhaps the Texas Theater was a failsafe rendezvous in case the original plan failed. What could have happened might be more like Oswald was supposed to rendezvous at the evacuation meeting place but realized he was being set-up as a patsy and went to the Texas Theater instead. Or Martin is full of it and Oswald was supposed to be killed at the Texas Theater but wasn't.

It's hard to trace the disinformation supplied by the insiders because of the different layers and levels of the conspiracy and what those persons were privy to themselves. It's also hard to see where "Oswald made a mistake" because after all he did make it to the Texas Theater. Was it the alleged shooting of Tippit or was it running past the ticket booth? When you input Douglass you can see Martin's story doesn't reflect the truth about the CIA double setting up Oswald or vice versa. Or maybe the whole evacuation plan spoken of by Larry King was just a ruse to make all the players think everything was on the up and up in order to conceal their true patsy plans.

[Marc Ellis]

Marc

While discussing Summer's book you refer to Destiny Betrayed and McAdams site.
Now, someone who does not know much about the research community might think
that Summers, McAdams and DiEugenio have the same value, that they are of equal importance.
Which clearly is not the case. McAdams is a waste of time and you have to listen to the experienced
members of this site and stop reading him, is full of disinfo. If you want to learn more about McAdams
visit http://www.ctka.net/2013/mcadams.html and http://www.ctka.net/2013/mcadams_2.html.
So if you want to learn more about the JFK assassination drop McAdams, Summers book is nothing great either (apart what is based in Bill Kelly's work which is good) and read some good books. I can propose some of them which is i have read. There are other great books which i have not read. You have already read Destiny Betrayed, so:

Oswald and the CIA by John Newman
JFK and Vietnam by John Newman
A Certain Arrogance by G.M. Evica
Deep Politics I & II by Peter Dale Scott
The Man who Knew too Much by Dick Russell
Harvey and Lee by John Armostrong
Battling Wall Street by Donald Gibson
A Breach of Trust by Gerald McKnight
JFK and the Unspeakable by Jim Douglass
The Last Investigation by Gaeton Fonzi

it was never my intention to imply they were equal. McAdams' style is to argue a point
and then do a victory dance whether he has proven his point or not.

But my question about Walker came from reading Summers', not McAdams.

[Tracy Riddle]

The Walker shooting was first linked to Oswald via a far-right West German newspaper that had interviewed Walker after the assassination. They speculated that Oswald and Ruby had shot at Walker (Jew-Commie conspiracy).

Walker himself always seems to have doubted that Oswald shot at him. When the bullet supposedly dug out of his wall was shown on TV during the HSCA hearings in the late 1970s, Walker wrote a letter to them saying it was NOT the same bullet he had handled. I personally think the shooting was staged by some of his supporters to create sympathy for him in the media, after the bad press he'd received due to his actions in Mississippi.

As for McAdams, when I first got on the internet circa 1993, I typed in "Kennedy assassination" into whatever search engine we used then (Alta Vista or Excite or whatever), and up popped McAdams' site as the first hit.