Dawn Meredith

:lol:thank goodness, i do not belong to facebook or sell medicine... here is a copy of the email that magda received, if any get such, discard or perhaps save them for when all is corrected it may help the server to track them,whatever, sorry about this if any are bothered, it is not moi..thanks b Here is the text of the email: I'm Sorry I didn't inform you about my trip to Spain for a program,I am presently in Madrid Spain,something extremely awful happened to me,I was mugged at gun point on my way to the Hotel by some Hoodlums and they made away with my Bag and other valuables. Presently my things are been held down by the hotel management due to my inability to pay the hotel bills which I currently owe,they even had to restrict my access to the hotel facilitates until outstanding bills are cleared and i don't have any money on me again,i had to walk down to the city library in order to send you this email.I have spoken to the embassy here but they are not responding effectively to the matter. This is really shameful,I need you to help me with a loan of 2,600 Euro to pay my hotel bills and get my self back home.I will reimburse you soon as I get back Home, with all the interest.I will appreciate whatever you can assist me with. Let me know Immediately Bernice iam in SPAIN, LOL, LLH I got it as well B. and immediately guessed it was not you because of how it is written. Not your style. I am very sorry your email was hacked but am relieved that this did not happen to you. Dawn

Thanks Jack...most interesting...unexplained money...moving suddendly...the handwriting, the eyes, looking forward to more. Yes the ""ald" is pretty conclusive. Next time we go to COPA we will definately stop at Baylor and check out more of John's research. We couldn't in 09 because Erick had to see a kid in foster care in Waco. Dawn

Was this an attempt of blackmail on your part? I have no idea what you and Andy communicated by email. Blackmail?????? Not at all, it was a totally sincere email. That what was said to me via email in confidence remained so, and it was not just about a former member. I thought you were cc'd on the emails but I may be misremembering. At any rate I have not ever discussed it. All I meant was exactly what I said: that private mail should remain so. Period. Dawn

You also have my email to you, whichh states basically the same thing. I have sent this to my atty. as well, an expert in patent/copyright law. Things that are said in confidence are expected to remain that way. I refer you to the "ps" in my email to you, of which no one is aware but the people to whom it pertains. I removed it from those to whom I resent the email; I expect the same from you John. Thank you, and nice to see the forum back up. Dawn

In this pic I see no resemblance to any LHO pics but in the two pics that Jack posted below I see an extraordinary similarity. Hard to believe the Norton Zach posted is the same person in the school pic. I suppose some people do change over time. But I can take a junior high pic of me and compare it to one taken last week and there is little difference, just a few grey hairs. Since grading much of Harvey and Lee I am now most interested in Norton. Thanks Zach and Jack. Dawn

OMG Robert will you LOOK at the damn things. You do not even have to study the evidence here, though that would be helpful too, they are so beyond FAKE!!! And The article that Jim Fetzer did is fantastic. I don't care what Marina says. Her ability to change stories probably has a lot to do with fear. Recall that Harvery, upon seeing these fakes said they were fake and that his face was superimposed on somone's head. Look at the damn chin!!!! Geez!!!! Dawn

Jim: It was always a majority rule. The email she posted was Madga's attempt at trying to reason with MB. Humor her if you will. I had known about the Peter Tosh name back in 08, but had forgotten. And Myra knows this. She is cherry picking her emails. She is desperate. To say WE hacked DPF is absurd. She has admitted she pulled the plug. I will not be responding further to her or Colby. Fitting that they are fast friends now. Her attempt to destroy DPF only backfired. We will be better than ever and no more bitchy emails all time. As to my freaking job, MB and Colby always resport to THAT. I have done the same thing for over twenty five years. Successfully. Some people change jobs and towns like other's change shoes. Ya gotta wonder about that. Dawn

It is there in full on the thread I began referenceing the return of DPF. Just click on the link, there is the full statement. I came back to EF because I have many friends here and I was so enjoying Jim DiEugenio's posts that I decided I wish to post occassionally myself. For those who observe, Merry Christmas. Dawn

Myra's point is surely correct. You cannot have moderators posting abusive comments about other members on the forum. I can understand her frustration when she was outvoted, but that is the way democracy works. That's not how the DPF democracy was supposed to work. When deciding something as substantial as a staff change (e.g., firing Drago from the moderation team or inviting David Guyatt back into the team) a unanimous vote was always required. For 2.5 years. No exception. Until Jan posed the vote to bring Drago back from purgatory. Even though I voted "no way no how" it was clear that he'd be coming back anyway. It was the pre-coup. They ignore rules when the rules hinder them from doing what they want: dusting off the abusive Drago, using pseudonyms, whatever. If that was the case, you were clearly in the right. This is <wrong> and Myra knows it It was ALWAYS a majority vote from day one. MB tried to unilaterally change the rule on 12/16. Just before she pulled the plug-her words- on DPF. She's in good company now. I'm sure she will begin picking fights with you all over here very soon. Her nasty temper is legendary. Dawn, why don't you offer evidence when you make such claims? You are an attorney Dawn. Are you truly unaware of the value of evidence? Or do you lack evidence? I am in the process of responding to the post by DPF's remaining members, and I am providing evidence as part of my response. When people see evidence they can make an informed decision about the events being discussed. It's kind of like a courtroom Dawn, with a jury. If you have evidence that supports your allegations, by all means post it. Also, from a logical standpoint why do you say "She's in good company now." Presumably you are referring to the EF, and you are in the very same company since you opt to post here at the EF. Dawn. Mere logic MB. If we had a "must be unanimous" rule then you could have disappeared CD with your vote. Alas, becasue it is and always has been majority rule, your only option was to "pull the plug". Thereby showing your true colors. Goodbye forever. I have ZERO left to say to you, ever.

Myra's point is surely correct. You cannot have moderators posting abusive comments about other members on the forum. I can understand her frustration when she was outvoted, but that is the way democracy works. That's not how the DPF democracy was supposed to work. When deciding something as substantial as a staff change (e.g., firing Drago from the moderation team or inviting David Guyatt back into the team) a unanimous vote was always required. For 2.5 years. No exception. Until Jan posed the vote to bring Drago back from purgatory. Even though I voted "no way no how" it was clear that he'd be coming back anyway. It was the pre-coup. They ignore rules when the rules hinder them from doing what they want: dusting off the abusive Drago, using pseudonyms, whatever. If that was the case, you were clearly in the right. This is <wrong> and Myra knows it It was ALWAYS a majority vote from day one. MB tried to unilaterally change the rule on 12/16. Just before she pulled the plug-her words- on DPF. She's in good company now. I'm sure she will begin picking fights with you all over here very soon. Her nasty temper is legendary.

http://deeppoliticsforum.net/forums/showthread.php?5656-Recent-Events >

I accept Dawn's most recent explanation that it was a one person coup and a hijacking of the forum. If that's the bottom line then the other speculations are out the window, including the allegation of a Wikileaks hackjob. And I never said there was a giant ruse put out by anybody, I just questioned the allegation of a Wikileaks hackjob, which turned out not to be true. I just don't like the idea of anyone pretending something is one way when knowing in fact it is quite another. BK I will post this one last time: No one pretended anything. For legal reasons we could not get into the details. This is still the case. Why are you all having such a hard time understanding this? Myra attempted a hostile coup and we are in legal consults now. What she did was both illegal criminally and in violation of copyright law. When we are free to speak -legally free and in other ways- a joint statement from DPF will be posted. Until then this is my final word on the matter. Dawn

You don't have a clue what you are talking about. Legal constraints prevent me from detailing exactly what occurred but there are NO "splinter groups". One person attempted a coup. Period. It is that simple. When our lawyers tell us it is ok we will make a joint statement. The rest of us are co-operating just fine, which I am sure you are delighted to hear. Happy Holidays, Dawn

This is what it is looking like. Thank you John for reopening this thread, and I hope that such threads are not locked again, though it would probably be wise to keep similar topics on one thread - ala this one and Gary Mack, rather than having a half dozen threads on the same subject. As for Myra shutting down the forum she was the sole administrator of, and then reactivating it, I don't know the rational beind it. But to say that Dawn, Charles and the others are interested in the truth, then why did they try to blame the WickiLeaks hackers when they knew for a fact it was Myra? I don't buy the idea that these hackers can take down forums and attack web sites (like my Grand Jury and Congressonal Oversight Petitions were attacked), and this forum was attacked and taken down, and those responsible can never be identified. These criminals who attack web sites they disagree with or take down forums as the Ed Forum was taken town more than once, can and should be identified. The Ed Forum was taken down more than once by the same type of attack that the WickiLeaks people used, but months before they gave the software away for free download to anyone who wanted it. So this forum was attacked by someone or some people before the WickiLeaks software was made availabe. I believe those who have attacked my petitions and this web site are not annonymous hackers who we'll never know, but people we already know, and are either members or former members of the forum who can and should be identified. Thanks again to John Simkin for maintaining this forum despite the antics of a few. Bill Kelly NO ONE AT DPF EVER SAID OR SUGGESTED IT WAS WIKILEAKS. I am most disappointed in you Bill. You are spreading falsehoods and I know not why. When we are able a joint statement will be posted. Until then please stop making false accusations. Show me WHERE anyone from DPF said it was wikileaks. I think JIm D ASKED this question here and we could not respond for legal reasons. I am posting this w/o consulting the other co-founders as I need to get to work. Dawn Thanks to Jack white and Jim DiEugenio. (If I have omitte anyone, I apologise)

DPF was created by -- with one tragic exception -- founders who contribute to, and act as, custodians of the work of researchers from around the world. The destructive, immoral, and perhaps even criminal acts committed by one of our own define even as they transcend vandalism and hacking; they amount to attacks on history of the sort commonly identified with the darkest of deep political forces. As previously stated: The Deep Politics Forum is wholly dedicated to free speech. Contrary to recent vitriolic speculation -- born of petty jealousies and/or the intent to destroy a source of truth, integrity, and courageously held convictions -- it hosts a full Wikileaks mirror and is proud to do so. The costs involved in running the DPF and its Wikileaks mirror, are entirely borne by the forum's founders - although donations are always welcome - but membership is and will always remain free. As a point of principal we are an advertising-free forum and will always remain so. PLEASE MAKE CAREFUL NOTE: The undersigned, all founding members who contribute to the running costs of DPF, and will continue to do so, are the ONLY individuals authorized to speak for and otherwise represent the Deep Politics Forum: Charles Drago, David Guyatt, Magda Hassan, Jan Klimkowski, Dawn Meredith

Interesting Jim. I knew that about Paul Hoch, who I have had my own opinions about for decades but did not know it about PDS. Has he changed his view? (Sorry if this appears to be a dumb question, I am a bit distracted today). I am a Garrison partisan and always have been and LOVE the film JFK. Dawn Dawn

The Deep Politics Forum is wholly dedicated to free speech. Contrary to recent vitriolic speculation, it hosts a full Wikileaks mirror and is proud to do so. The costs involved in running the DPF and its Wikileaks mirror, are entirely borne by the forum's founders - although donations are always welcome - but membership is and will always remain free. As a point of principal we are an advertising-free forum and will always remain so. We will not be making any further statements on the EF about the hacking we have suffered. Dawn Thanks to those interested in truth.

Not paying the bills? Bull crap John. This is NOT what has occurred. We all know exactly what did and I am not presently at liberty to discuss it. And we have been around for years now. We get lots of views. Dawn To John Simkin You wrote: "It clearly has not been hacked or has suffered a denial of service. It would seem they have been unwilling to pay their bills." In fact, DPF was hacked. Your statement that the founders have been unwilling to pay their bills is a supposition on your part, and a wholly false one. You wrote: "The problem for Deep Politics was that it did not get many page views." Complete rubbish and factually wrong. The DPF equivalent of the "political conspiracies" section of the EF is vibrant and thriving, with over three hundred members and surfers viewing on a regular basis, and thousands of page views in many threads. Many members are specialist researchers and the range of debate and subjects discussed is far in excess of anything ever achieved by the EF. Indeed, by comparison, the EF "Political Conspiracies" section is a dead zone, with a hanful of viewers and a chronically poor standard of debate. This is a direct result of the bias and deceit of moderator Burton and the disruption tactics of the likes of "Colby". And your own gross negligence. You wrote: "Unfortunately, it is very difficult for new forums to get established in search-engine rankings. As they found that forum debates was just a small group of people talking to each other they probably decided it was not worth the money or the intellectual effort involved." John - you seem to be describing the EF "Political Conspiracies" section. DPF will soon be resurrected, and will continue to expose the nefarious activities of deep political forces. We know our friends and we know our enemies. The founders of the Deep Politics Forum

Not paying the bills? Bull crap John. This is NOT what has occurred. We all know exactly what did and I am not presently at liberty to discuss it. And we have been around for years now. We get lots of views. Dawn

That's all she said about it. It certainly looks like her. I don't know who the man is. Who did the illustration of the autopsy? The pathologist holding up the arm looks like John Liggett, based on the one photo I've seen of him. It's interesting to see that Nixon and George H.W. Bush also were there. Ron WHAT??? Nixon and George HW Bush at the autopsy of JFK????? I have never heard this before. Just when it cannot get any stranger. Dawn

With all due respect, that comes across as an equivalent to Gary Mack's infamous statement, "I have not seen any hard evidence of conspiracy." Doug: She has proof that they worked together. What about Anna Lewis? Anna did not even like Judyth so why would she lie? Have you read Ed Haslam's book? Judyth's? I do not think it is fair to pass judgement on someone withouth reading the person's book first. In fact you and I are in agreement on Armstrong's work on another thread. Dawn Dawn: Your point is fair. Yes, I have Haslam's book and have read it. I have followed Judyth for over a decade and carefully followed the monumental thread here.I have seen Judyth change so many things to conform to the tough questions asked of her. I don't want to raise questions here because I don't want to tip Judyth off. If her story is legitimate then she can enhance her credibility in a number of ways: produce the physical evidence, i.e., the Oswald handwriting, the Mary Ferrell tape recording, etc. and submit herself to questions that she doesn't have a chance to ponder and choose which one's to ignore and answer. The truth can defend itself. If she does not produce the evidence she claims to have do you not agree the failure to do so should construe that evidence against her. Judyth had stated she wasn't going to subject herself to any further questions but she has appeared on the radio, etc. It is easy to fool the unknowing. There were , as I mentioned before, aspects of her story that at first intriqued me, i.e., where would she get the idea that she and Oswald were going to write a science fiction book? I discovered how she was able to do that. I am always reticent with witnesses who embrace their own celebrity. Judyth has motive to fabricate and I believe that could be exposed. Do you really believe she could remember all the dialogue she writes? I certainly could not. Whoever Oswald was I do not believe any evidence establishes he was a James Bond-Renaissance man character. As far as Armstrong, you can see I was one of the many people he dedicated the book to, so many things were run by me directly. I do believe there are stronger aspects of his book than others and I have questions but most people do not know the right questions to ask. I am curious. Did Judyth contact you or did you contact her? My best, Doug Weldon Doug: I am pretty sure that I contacted her. I was asked to help by another forum member. This was to try to get the Anna Lewis video. But I am not in touch with Ms. Conway so I had no way to accomplish that, other than enlist others to assist. I have not followed her every word. Just do not have the time. As far as the dialogue goes in her book I am assuming this is mostly made up. No one could remember ACTUAL dialoge from that long ago. So it has to be paraphrased. I do not know what celebrity she has embraced or what motive she would have for ruining her life and not being able to be in this country with her children and grandchildren. That part of the Love Affair that jumped out at me as false was when they "accidentally" met. But in reading her book it became clear that this meeting was no accident. I would indeed like to see the handwriting tested and any other recordings she claims to have. But would even this satisify people? Even her detractors agree that they worked at Reily together. Dawn

With all due respect, that comes across as an equivalent to Gary Mack's infamous statement, "I have not seen any hard evidence of conspiracy." Doug: She has proof that they worked together. What about Anna Lewis? Anna did not even like Judyth so why would she lie? Have you read Ed Haslam's book? Judyth's? I do not think it is fair to pass judgement on someone withouth reading the person's book first. In fact you and I are in agreement on Armstrong's work on another thread. Dawn

John is not comfortable with EVIDENCE, which is a BIG PROBLEM for him. There were SIX OSWALDS! Have you bothered to read the book Ray? It certainly does not sound like it. There is a ton of EVIDENCE in the book. Jim D has laid out some here. Doug I saw John last Nov at COPA and he did not appear to have a problem with speaking in public, but he is mostly retired from this case. His work speaks for him. Dawn

Wrong again. Anyone who has read Armstrong takes it very seriously. I thought Martin's questions were great. It is not LHO bashing to ask these questions. Interesting if Marnia did say that then she did mix them up purposely, imho. Or was lead to. Dawn

I believe the "war on terror" is a myth. Because I believe 9-11 was an inside job. I have been reading an article by Clinton in Time mag. About the election of 2000. Got me wondering about 9-11. Had Gore won the election would the attacks have occurred? Was this false falg the Cheney neocons or a more hidden power elite? If there was no 9-11 we would not be in two wars. Dawn