Dawn Meredith

John: This is exactly what your forum provides and why I could never imagine leaving. The sense of community here, the collective intelligence and sharing of research ha caused me to believe that this case CAN be solved. You provide a great service. A true "patriot", not the wanna be's that W and his cronies thump about. DAwn Much of the above two comments I think are true and correct. I'd add however that many of us who have worked long and hard on the case have become specialists in a specific area and have become 1)sensitive to criticism or even attacks on our specific work or specialized information and 2) sometimes too jealously guard what we know - not fully wanting to share and thus 'loose' control over it for our next book, to satisfy ego gratification, maintain bragging rights, and a host of other reasons. Human, Human, all too Human. Also, some among us (I think) are here only to muddy the waters, cause disagreements and dissention etc. They fall into two catagories, I believe. 1] Those who just think LHO killed JFK and, thus, we others are all nuts or 2] are partners, employees or invested with those who would and did kill the President and cover it up - and do to this day. Knowledge of the latter by many of the researchers can lead to quick reflex responses against their own cabal-killed-JFK posts and ideas. They covered-up the crime and no doubt want to confuse and disable the only real researchers - the citizen researchers. The first catagory are welcome, but I always wonder why they are here (I don't feel interested to go to the-holocaust-never-happened sites and try to argue with those evil nuts). If we are so delusional just leave us in our delusion. In fact, We the citizen researchers, have done the greater part of solving this case - not any official body [Garrison excepted], really. I find it sad to see the attacks and angry words no matter who is involved. We need to work together when we can and learn to ignore those we can not work with. This should be less of a match of wits and ego - and more of a cooperative work in progress on the case and solving it - whatever our beliefs and predjudices, etc. As far as John's actions I don't agree with all always, but he is tolerant, even-handed, slow to anger and has done a marvelous job, I think, in both getting some of us together here and forwarding the positive movement on the case and related matters. I have NO idea how he finds time to keep up on all on this site! His summaries on various players in the assassination and postings of these has done a great service to all of us. None of us are perfect and many of us do (or should) regret some postings we have made when in error or in anger. Another problem with these types of forums [as with email] is not taking time to reflect and collect one's thoughts and regain equilibirim before replying. All in all I think the site is a positive contribution and I regret that more accomplished and knowledgable researchers don't more often join in. Some likely don't because they are too busy. Far too many others don't like the negative sides we are all discussing here. Those here to sew dissention, in that regard, over the years have had some success. Don't let the bastards win. Ignore them rather than attack them, however. Now I hope I can follow my own sermon. Peace. Peter: Your post should be read often as a reminder. Thanx for the eloquence, and pointing out the obvious. I so enjoy your presence here. Dawn

I received several trojans and a few pop up viruses trying to attach to my computer at work while viewing the JFK Debate site. This happened for around 4 days straight at from June 10th on. Luckily, the viruses were repelled or "quarantined" by my virus protection. But I started to wonder why would someone post viruses on the site. I had the same problem and had to re-instal Norton firewall. It tied my computer up almost a day. I think there are nasty people out there who would like nothig better than see this place crash and burn. But John has great protection and we have rather good firewalls as well. Dawn Was it a student, or someone else? Did someone want to discourage us from sharing information on the JFK Assassination? Aww-- that's paranoid thinking. -- Bill Grote

Yet amazingly enough those threads seem to get the most hits. So Dawn, have you ever considered just scrolling past those post or posters that you don't care to read ... that's what I do. Bill Bill, I do, but my complaint is when I see so many threads get hijacked by this crap and THEN the original post is just lost in this. Like the Press Conference a few weeks back, then more recently the American U speech observance, where a new poster -some PR dude- just insulted the posters. It's so much like obvious disinfo- to get the posts away FROM the initinal point- that it appears to be organized, and this was precisely what Jack White's point was. So I guess my main point is can we stay ON point? We all know you and David Healy have it in for each other and that is fine, all I am asking is that it not hijack so many threads. Because I know virtually nothing re alteration of Z film and I did try to learn by reading the posts but the anger far outweiged any meaningful discussion...so I am left to my own view. I would love to see a short and to the point list of the reasons for belief and against. I am "against" as why the hell would they leave in the headshot??? And I do not think they ever thought this film would see the light of day: Thank God for Groden and whoever assisted in his obtaining it from Time. (I was told about 30 years or so ago Bob actually stole it: if so GREAT. ) I remember seeing it - on Geraldo- on tv in 75 and thought "maybe this WILL go someplace"...Alas.... Dawn

Time out ... there isn't room`for another 'Baghdad Bob' ... David has that job! Jim, there is a reason why you cannot speak at a Dallas conference anymore and you just provided it. As far as Jack's and David's contributions ... I'll let the forum archive speak about that. Bill Miller Same old crap. Let it go guys. Think of the new comers here. They come to learn and to contribute. There are 4-6 posters here who just do flaming....it's so tiring. I have been mainly pleased with Jack's level of scholorship, tho sometimes I don't "get" him on other matters (moon landing eg) but I don't see him resorting to the attacks that I see with David and Bill (mainly on each other) and also Colby does a lot of this as well. I agree that this just brings the forumn down. And I too stay away when I see this stuff, especially when posts get hijacked.... John and Andy do not have time to read thru each and every post and we have been told to behave like rational, intelligent adults. So let's agree to disagree and whern one MUST flame there's the PM function as the rest of us really don't care to read it. Thanks , Dawn

Or perhaps he left because he could not stand that the WC was a house of cards, from the start. Dawn

[quote name='Ashton Gray' date='Jun 15 2006, 11:09 AM' post='65481'] It's I who must thank you, now, for your extraordinarily gracious and comprehensive reply, and also must beg your indulgence, in turn, while I give it all due and thorough consideration. Pending a more responsive response to your response, I'll say that on its face it clears up quite a lot in broad strokes. One thing it specifically did pique my curiosity about, though, is the circumstances under which you had met Bernard Barker about a year before you ended up representing him. Was that through association with Mr. Hunt, or just one of those "happy accidents" that make life endlessly entertaining? I know you're busy with your book, but if you get a chance. Meanwhile, I hope you'll also find an opportunity to visit an article I just posted here, There was no "first break-in" at the Watergate, which you may find of some interest in relation to your representation of the co-conspirators in the early going. Ashton Gray I too thank you Doug for your response here, as well as to the other questions I had (privately). I will get my answer to those question thru other means and it may be quite soon...(I will PM you: new source last nite!!). I hope to read all the new Watergate stuff this Sat and Sunday...have read in bits and pieces and it is FASCINATING. Great that someone is adding so much to this oh SO interesting case. Dawn

[/color]Hey Girlfriend, Missed you around here. Ter, is this song actually about JFK? I remember hearing it alot when it was out but not really listening to the lyrics (unlike when I was younger knew em all!) Sure sounds like it could BE about JFK. Dawn

I don't get to laugh out loud very often, so Mark: Thanx for the laugh of the week. He sure does have a way with words; that no-one can dispute! Dawn

John: I agree. DC is full of information, I do hope you take Mike's advice and keep a journal. I have such vivid memories of a few trips there in 1974 and 1975, doing research at the liabrary of Congress. This was pre-internet and I had really gottn very spooked by a lot of stuff I received from Sherman Skolnick- (who sadly passed on recently). So I did as much research as I could as the liabrary of COngress. It felt so exceiting at the time, and scary too. Of course now we can easliy look up just about anything on the net. Perhaps you could even get to meet some of the members of the House and or Senate, tour the WH...(If W allows such). Glad you got to go to the conference! Dawn

John: I remember all this from when Vernon was threatening you. I am not on the other forum so was not aware of the trouble you went thru there, but I wish to say that you are most tolerant here in you allowance of free speech. If people do not wish to read the lone nutters like Purvis (for example) or the never ending debate about the alleged Z film alteration, one can avoid such, (and I do), but you do what you say you will do and that is promote educational debate. I believe you have added greatly to the general knowledge of this case and that writers of such stature as the ones who have come here are a testament to this forum. Of course you do not and should not take threats of legal action lightly. But even there you are quick to give the person a second chance. I am referring to of course Tim Gratz. He made such a threat and you allowed him time to reconsider and when he did not he was banned. And rightly so. I have been calling for "uniting" the research community forever it seems and believe that the conspirators derive great satisfaction in seeing all the infighting and ego tripping. (I do believe the powers that be closly moniter such forums as these as well as the books). I would even go so far as to say that some books are actually doomed from the start. I think this is true for Carl Oglesby's brilliant Yankee Cowboy War: Conspiracies from Dallas to Watergate, and I believe The Politics Of Heroin and SouthEastAsia (Dr. Alfred McCoy) met with a similar fate. I am sure dozens more examples can be given. So please folks can we all -again- listen to John here and UNITE in our true goal: that of getting this case solved. Isn't this far more important than our petty differences? Since the corporate media is aiding and abetting the conspirators it's always been up to the research community to forge ahead and seek the truth. Please let's not lose sight of this and instead lose the bickering. Thanx, Dawn

For those of us, like myself, who see many connections between the murder of JFk and Watergate, posters need to check out all the new posts on the Watergate page. A lot of reading, that I have not had the time to fully explore, but great stuff.... I know I just often forget to go to the "Controversial issues" part of the forum, get so caught up in this debate, then it's time for work, and literally weeks often pass before I look at this section. Much to my surprise a few days ago I discovered a lot to be read and absorbed there. Yet no one is responding, so I wondered if others, like myself, forget to regularily go to this area of this terrific forum. GWIW, Dawn

James, This pic looks remarkedly like Lois Gibson's sculpture. I know you have excellent sources for pics, but I cannot imagine where you aquired this one. I thought Rogers literally disappeared off the map. The pic in "The Man on the Grassy Knoll" is from 1945. I agree that Rogers does not look like the "small tramp", nor do I think Harrelson resembles the "tall tramp". I always used to think the third tramp was E Howard Hunt, tho I have been often pulled by the explanations given by the Holt story, including several emails I had with Holt's daughter a few years back. Whatever his role-if any- in the murder of JFK- this is one very intensely fascinating book and deserves a read by every serious researcher. Charles Rogers was clearly doing intelligence work and that he was able to just vanish after the brutal murder of his parents demonstrates the power of the intelligence programs-even back then. I totally concur with Shanet's post above. Dawn

Historians and journalists are unwilling to investigate the assassination of President Kennedy, to cite our example, because they know that they will be punished, as you suggest in question number 3 were they to do so. They would get very small advances from the small publishers, and would have to finance the research themselves as I had to do. I wrote books about Japanese movies for the British Film Institute, I wrote those books about Latin America, to help pay for the research because my advance was so law. As for the documents, many but not all are available at the National Archives. Anyone can view these documents. People are out there to be interviewed. These establishment historians have chosen, and this is a choice, not to explore what really happened to President Kennedy because they fear reprisal in the form of damage to their careers and to their financial well being. Once the press rubber-stamped the Warren Report, and refused even to explore its contradictions, the press of our country became embedded in the official cover up. They continue to be embedded largely in official versions of events today, but it began, I believe, with the Kennedy assassination. Jim Garrison reopened his investigation of the Kennedy assassination when he read Dwight Macdonald's article in Esquire magazine about the Warren Report and its deficiencies. But Macdonald, an old radical, was an exception in recognizing that the Warren Commission had done no real investigation. Even the great journalist I.F. Stone refused to deal with the Kennedy assassination honestly. I do not believe that our country would have been damaged politically had the truth of government involvement in the murder of President Kennedy been reported. The reverse is the case. Democracy is weakened by the press maintaining official lies; please see "9/11 and 11/22," my op ed piece on my website http://www.joanmellen.net/NYC_2006article.html which compares the lies of two Presidential commissions, the Warren Commission and the 9/11 Commission. Joan is so correct. When friends ask me why I am still- after 43 years!!- studying this case I try to make them understand that the coup that occurred in 63 did not later just return to us our government. Instead things have steadily worsened. Compare the situation today with JFK's bravery. This country is barely recognizable; our Constitution is all but a sad memory. I blame the press for a lot of this. The CIA's Operation Mockingbird has never been more alive and well than in today's press. LIke Fox for example "fair and balanced?" When it's so pro- W and lackies that I cannot imagine a network MORE biased, against truth, fairness and balance. And the newspapers are no better. Our only hope is the net, that it remain unregulated. I cannot blame the journalists themselves because, as Joan points out, if one dares to write critically, the brass will edit such a piece so that it reflects their corporate "Mockingbird" stance. The days of a journalist like Earl Golz are long gone,and with him, freedom of the press. We live in very uncertain times. Why don't Americans wake up and demand better? I am afraid they have been so thoroughly brainwashed that they really don't realize that our precious freedoms are all but gone. We have an Attorney General who should be removed but his commander-in-chief is so Nazi- like it's truly horrifying. JIm Garrison, long ago , spoke about the rise of Nazism in Germany and compared the situation in the US to that time saying "I'm afraid Nazism will come to America in the name of national security". How prophetic! Dawn

"SS incompetence + Kennedy's arrogance got him killed, nothing more."[/color Excuse me???? I am under the impression that JFK was killed by a conspiracy. "nothing more??" Whatever. Dawn

[quote name='Duke Lane' date='Jun 12 2006, 10:26 PM' post='65234'] Along those lines - although not the primary purpose I'm interested in this info for - does anyone know where one might obtain the print supposedly belonging to Mac Wallace, and/or Wallace's own prints? Duke, This has been discussed here on the forum in great length. Including several of my own posts. You could try going thru the different pages of threads... I don't have time at the moment to go into the full explanation (and I did so in a previous post) but Mac Wallace's prints are virtually impossible to obtain now. It took J Harrison great effort to get them in 97, then Glen Sample was able to do so and I was told that because the officer he had (in California) obtained the prints without a case to which to accompany the prints TX Dept of Public Safety then put a lid on it. I know that Nathan Darby tried himself to get a set from DPS an was unsuccessful. Some have posted here that this should be like getting a copy of court record-which are public documents, but this is not the case. When Nathan was unable he asked for my help and I asked the assistance of a DA with whom I work. Soon's this DA learned I had no personal case to attach to my request he told me there was nothing I could do. So I told him the truth, that it involved the assassination, and I told him of Nathan's dilemma (his file was stolen from his home) but the DA said the only way he could request prints on someone is thru a case he had. I suspect also, in THIS case-it being Malcolm Wallace- the complications are much more than this explanation allows for. Dawn

[quote name='William Plumlee' date='Jun 12 2006, 06:18 PM' post='65218'] [ reply from plumlee: Dawn: Jay once told me "...the fingerprint is much like your photo..". I replied. "...its not my photo...". "...but your in it...". "...how do you know...", I asked. "... I know. I just know". Sound like Jay? God yes. He could be so damn cryptic. Like he was waiting for you to tell HIM. But often it was hard to tell...just what was up with the sometimes cat and mouse game. Because it was NEVER a game to him. This case was his LIFE. Your note just reminded me of a call he made to me one day telling me to go get a certain news paper. I did. Now, due to some new info, I am wondering if J was just proud of the story in the paper or was trying to give me a clue. (I did TAKE the clue if that was his intent). So now it's just one more question I will never get to ask.... Dawn

I agree about J and the best way to keep his memory alive I think is to further develop the fingerprint issue. Tho whenever I try I come to a brick wall. Hoping Walt Brown is able to take this issue farther. J put a lot of his life and time into that part of the case. Without J's work -( obtaining the print and then finding Nathan Darby)- Barr's book would have been mere conjecture, so perhaps Barr will move this aspect of the case further with new evidence. Glad to see you posting Tosh, I see your "buddy" G Hemming has left our midst. Seemed to coincide with the departure of Tim Gratz...curious. I sure miss the debates those two had with the inimitable RObert Donne (sp? Dunne?). Dawn

I have never gone public with this information and never even told you Tosh all the details. I did get an original uncropped cancellare - all others are cropped. I gave this copynegative to Tom Wilson [friend of C. Wecht I thought I could trust]. We had a signed agreement that the negative was to be returned to me along with his analysis. [He had a special computer program to enhance the photo and (he claimed) even identify the material reflecting the light - glass, metal, etc.]. Tosh, as you know we met at a hotel in Boulder, Colorado specifically to talk about this. Tom Wilson called me at the hotel and asked me questions of you in real time - based on his photo analysis. (I am in Europe now and don't have my original notes with me - though still have them elsewhere - so this is from memory...) Wilson said he saw two men on the South Knoll in the shadows in the area you had always said you were with your buddy that day in Dallas. He claimed further that he could make out in the enhancement a communication device matching others seen that day in size and shape. He further said he could see an optical device [binocular or monocular] held by the same [smaller, darker] man who held the communication device and that there was over the shoulder some rectangular photo-type case. There was more he could see in the photo including other locations and he promised to get me a written analysis, the photo enhancements and the negative back. I never got anything back!! I had two further phone calls with Wilson in which he described more of what he saw. He said the photo contained too much important information on the case to give back to me - that he wanted to use it as evidence in some trial....without being more specific. He demanded you tell him through me certain things before he returned the negative and the analysis report. You in turn wanted the anlysis before you answered any more of his questions. I was very upset and as you were getting angry at me - demanding the analysis I had promised - and unable to deliver it. I was in turn upset at Wilson for not keeping his agreement and denying me [and you and the world] whatever he had found. At about that time my own life underwent a 'collapse' and Wilson was less important than just survival. I did try through letters and calls to Wilson directly and through a few others who knew both of us to get the negative, enhancements and his analysis -but never did. I didn't know that you had spoken with him before he died. Can you tell a bit more of what he said in that conversation - either here on the forum or to me privately. If anyone in the Forum knows more about this matter, I'd be interested to know. If what Wilson claims he found are true, they would be rather significant [i am not putting it all here - as without any photo enhancements it is just speculation as to whether they can really be seen in the photos or not]. To my knowledge he never released his analyses on any of several photos. It is one of many examples of how other researchers can be even greater blocks to research and progress than the official disinformation/cover-up campaign. Sorry Tosh. Peter Plumlee: Thanks Pete for the clearification. I will try to keep this brief: I remember that day in Boulder well. It seemed to me that Wilson was not being honest with me and was trying to lead me into saying things I could not remember. Sergio did have a radio (not sure about the binoculars and he did have a concealed pistol) I had a clip board which we had drawn diagrams on earlier. (of which I had told you and Jim Marrs about earlier) I was not armed. This I told you and Wilson at Boulder. He (Wilson) told me that there were other images he had found in the picture and wanted me to tell him what they were. I wanted more information from him and you as to what those other images were. I was the one who lead you to the picture and you had Wilson to do photo work-- to try and prove there were two people at that location at the time of the shooting, thus proving a "front shoot" from the south knoll. He nor you would tell me (I see why now) what had been found. I was upset and thought I was being set up to confirm someone elses theroy and it was going to be used in their book or research. The object was to prove two people were standing in the shadows. If this had been proven as claimed by you and Wilson, I could not understand why the informationm was not being released. Yes, I was upset. I was more upset when Denver FBI came to Grant Colorado to talk to me about that picture. How did they know? I felt I was being set-up by you and Wilson and I told you so. And I told Jim Marrs also. It was at this point that I pulled away from all researchers and would not have anything futher to do with JFK matters. Then came along Joe West and the BS JF story, Oliver Stone and his BS story and a host of other BS planted stories and falsehoods. Some concerning me. Then came the IRS and attatched everything I owned (which was not a hell of a lot) A few years later and just before Tom Wilson died I got in touch with him and was told he, "... wanted to do more work before he released his findings..". I ask him if he would confirm for me that two people were standing at that location. He said there were two people standing there and he had found another person concealed near the railroad tracts and ask me about that person. That is when I was told, by Tom, copies of his work had been turned over to law enforcement and he would not release any information to me without their approval. I was mad as hell and felt betrayed and released, or tried to release, the picture you had obtained, to the public. I begged you and others to take a closer look at that picture. You told me it had been lost and your place had been broken into a most of your research had been removed. That is when all hell broke loose and I was discredited by a host of researchers... some of these "so-called experts" did not even try to prove or disprove..., or even look at the picture. They just said nothing was there. I knew then that this JFK research is nothing but BS in itself.... infiltrated by "special interest" type personal, including law enforcement on a national level, as well as publishers who want to make history rather than record history Not long after that I was called to DC to testifie about other matters. In DC the "south knoll" picture was shown to me by Kerry's people and I was asked about it. I refused to comment Pete. Its a lost cause the picture and the information behind it has become "contaminated" and is of no use. Thats the way I intend to leaveit. I learned "...don't cast you pearls before the Swine... ". ......we should put this to bed...... its of no value. Again thanks again for the clearification. Your Friend Tosh WOW!!! Tosh and Peter, This certainly sounds very exciting. I am too busy with law at the moment to have much time for the forum so I just glanced and saw Tosh (always interested in what he has to say, especially since he was close to our pal Jay Harrison!!) so I just read Peter's post then Tosh's. With all due respect, and knowing little of what this is, it sure sounds like there is photographic evidence of some conspirators (or tosh and friend) ?? and that this guy who suddenly died seems like another "coincidence". Sadly, I do totally agree with Tosh that MANY in the so called "research community" are plants, or ego trippers and I have seen enough hostility up close and personal in this little world in my 33 years of active investigation of this case to last a lifetime. I used to be trusting and am still overly so...but I do keep confidences. Sounds like this could be a break in the case, or wishful thinking on my part. (Tosh I totaly respect your opinion and if you saya this evidnece is too compromised to be of use then you're most likely correct...but....???) Sure would be nice. (fwiw) Dawn

Well put Robert. It's been very sad to see this forum turn into one flame war after another. It also makes for mighty boring reading. FOr example I completely ignore the Z film fights....and was angered when the thread on the DC press conference devolved into that crap. I wanted to hear more from the presenters who really had something to offer. Alas, the never ending debate over the legitimacy of the Z film ended that initial conversation. (One wonders if this was perhaps the intent?). As for Marnia, it has long been clear that she told differing stories. I have never held this against her in any fashion but felt she must have been terrified by the position she found herself in. Married to the man accused of killing a popular president. The patsy. No legal status in the US...Had her inquisitors told her to say the moon is green cheese she would not doubt have repeated it. And so would the rest of us in her situation. I have nothing but respect for Marnia. I was thrilled when she began speakig out on her belief in her husband's innocence. I do not know her but I did obtain her phone number in 1985 and on 11/22 dialed part of the number but, out of respect for her privacy, did not complete the call. Dawn

He has been unwilling to answer my questions concerning the CIA internal report on his relationship with James Angleton. He has also refused to answer questions about his books on this Forum. Gus Russo, Dale Myers and Gerald Posner are the others who have refused this offer. I wonder why. A rhetorical question?? Great article Doug. Thanx for posting it. Really good detective work here. I totally agree with John re Deep Throat. Dawn

I totally agree Jim. Let's see just when another DA risks his reprutation, his job and his very life to try to crack the jfk assassination. And bravo to Stone for making Garrison's story. I LOVE that film!!! Dawn