Dawn Meredith

----------------------------- Nice article Gerry, thanx for posting it. Today it really is the 25th anniversry of the death of Lennon. Words seem rather trite. Remember John's wonderful little book from 1964 "In His Own Write" ? My personal fav there is "A Surprise for Little Bobby". Still cracks me up. What a mind. What a loss. Dawn

[quote name='Tim Carroll' date='Dec 7 2005, 10:43 PM' post='47790'] I find threads that contain a conclusion in the title to be skewed from the start. In this case, the title containing an assertion about someone who's "defending alleged terrorists" (as if they don't deserve a defense) is by someone who's "curious what the members here think of Ramsey Clark." We find that after some guy who wrote about MLK and JFK "in Light of the Fourth Gospel" (whatever the hell that means) is unable to get anything out of Ramsey Clark about the Kennedy assassination, another author's article is presented, again with a skewed subtitle: "Stalinist Dupe or Ruling-Class Spook?" Well howdy! That's quite a range of choice; Posner couldn't have framed it better.[ OK, so I admit it was not a very good title. I just found the article curious. I wanted to remind people that Clark is still covering up for the WC, and so I referred to the interview that he did with a FRIEND OF HIS. Douglas has done a lot of fantastic work for the casue of peace. He's someone who actually walks the walk, not just talks the talk. I guess just the word "gospel" gets your nickers twisted, but it is a beautiful essay. I wish it were online. I did not choose the article title, just find it curious. Of course all defendants deserve a good defense. I would not have been a defense attorney if I did not seriously believe this, so I am not casting aspersions on Clark for whom he chooses to defend. Only that he still backs the fraudulant WC. I guess if you take up enough good causes some here will give you a pass re the WC. I don't. As much as I admire the work Clark has gone on to do, that he will not even discuss the WC with a good friend of his detracts from his causes. Same goes for Bill Moyers. I like what he's done over the years on public tv, but he's still a cover-up artist when it comes to this most sordid event in our history. Dawn

JOHN; I GUESS THIS IS OK WITH YOU? THAT THIS xxxxx PUTS UP LINKS THAT IF WE OPEN DOES DAMAGE TO OUR COMPUTERS. I BELEIVE ADAM WILKINSON NOW MAKES SIX WHO HAVE COMPLAINED OF THIS. BOTH TERRY AND I REPORTED THIS TO YOU HERE ON THE FORUM OVER A WEEK AGO. IT'S ALSO A CRIME IN THE STATES TO DO THIS. WHY ARE YOU ALLOWING THIS? Dawn

Charming to see Mat/Lynne and TC in agreement. Nice to see "true colors" too, instead of phony pretence at friendship when it's only because someone wants something. Lynne: get bent, you're the psycho from hell. I find myself looking forward to when TC turns his most unpleasant temper on you. You're a new kid in town yet you've managed to incur the wrath of almost everyone here. Kinda fitting, you two...cute almost. Dawn

Tosh: I know I don't have to say this, but I get the distinct impression from GPH's posts that he is trying to intimidate you. Use of name calling, threatening email. Sounds like your presence here is quite threatening to him. I do hope that you will remain on the forum, at what ever level that you see fit, and perhaps some of this WILL actually get sorted out. I thank you for the thoughtful answers you give to poster's questions. We don't have many left on this planet who are a true part of this history and I think all here are most grateful for your contributions. Gerry: Sorry you found my question to be so stupid, but why should Joan Mellen SAY you told her Helms ordered the hit? You admit you "wasted (your) time with" her, so you obviously told her things. You throw the term "lawsuit" around fast and loose, like your buddy Gratz. What are your DAMAGES? Harm to your so- called reputation? I think if you are going to be here and others ask you reasonable questions regarding discrepancies in what you have said over the years, these are valid questions. Unless your real role here is to just yank people's chain. Dawn

[quote name='Robert Howard' date='Dec 8 2005, 12:33 AM' post='47807'] Does anyone have more than a passing interest of the prospect of inviting Peter Dale Scott to visit the Forum to answer questions about his new book "Drugs, Oil, and War: The United States in Afghanistan, Colombia, and Indochina" I believe this book will be the definitive work on the 'dynamics' of what has been gradually taking place in this country over the last five years i.e. foreign policy especially or, rather the fact that our countries neo-con foreign policy seems synonymous with the conceptualization of a 'third millenium version of the crusades'; I would, like to hear what ideas he has (as well as anybody else, for that matter) on making the ideas expressed in this thread part of the 'intellectual debate' in this country regarding 'our future,' when the extreme right or whatever you wan't to call the "neo-con cabal" which is at the wheel of American foreign policy more or less successfully passes itself off as 'mainstream' to the "Great Unwashed." The current intellectual debate in the media between left and right, between those opposed to the neo-conservative agenda and those who advocate it, remind me of a political version of the "Phony-War" or drôle de guerre, as the French put it. I believe it would be wonderful for Peter Dale Scott to come onto the forum. I suspect John may have already invited him, but it would not hurt to try again. His thoughts, and work have always been so very correct and insightful. I for one find the thought of 3 more years of Bush, his neo-cons and this war horribly depressing. I don't think the country can even sustain it; they've about broken us financially. I fear the next war Bush starts will be one with nukes: a terrifying prospect. I daresay I am more frightened by this administration and what I fear it is capable of than any before it, including Nixon and Bush 1, who were pretty damn scary too. Dawn

Pat: You're pretty correct in your take on Chomsky here, re the assasssination issue. I used to go see him speak back in the 70's - 80's at MIT where he teaches. I love his book "The Washingto Connection and Third World Fascism". During one of these lectures he and my old pal Carl Oglesby were both on the bill and that is when I first learned of Noam's "no conspiracy" view. I saw Carl- after the debate- try further to convince Chomsky, to no avail. So years later, after I got online, I'd check to see if this had changed. I have read letters between Chomsky and Salandria and Chomsky is truly "blind" on this. But then there are a lot of left leaning writers, journalists, etc. who take that stance. Max Holland is clearly CIA, or at least that's how he has always come across to me, but I don't think this is the case with other journalists. I think it's more attibutable to repeating what their "peers" say. Like Rather and Jennings, two prime examples. If THEY, "liberal bastions" that the Rush Limbough's say they are, believe in the WC, dare they question it? I also agree with Nathaniel (or whoever posted above) that they are not well-versed in assassination literature. Nor are they versed in the WC fantasy. So critics like us are preceived as "unbalanced", "seeing conspiracies where none exists". When in reality history is replete with conspiracy. Dawn

Kinda curious what the members here think of Ramsey Clark. A few years back JFk researcher James Douglas- (The Assassination of Martin Luther King and of John F. Kennedy, in Light of the Fourth Gospel)- interviewed Ramsey Clark, attempting to get him to express his views on the Kennedy assassination. Douglas and Clark had become friends due to thier mutual involvement in anti-war and other human rights causes, and Douglas had hoped Clark would finally be open to the issue of conspiracy. Not a chance. I find this article I am posting very timely and interesting in light of who Clark is presently defending: Saddam Husseim. Dawn THE MYSTERIOUS RAMSEY CLARK: STALINIST DUPE OR RULING-CLASS SPOOK? The Shadow ^ | 2000 | Manny Goldstein Posted on 12/07/2005 3:35:08 AM PST by Hunden Take a close look and there is something downright suspicious about former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, now the darling of certain sectors of the radical left. His journey has taken him from the heights of federal power to outer orbits of the political fringe. In the process, he has seemingly transformed from a shill for the most corrupt elements of the US elites to a shill for any foreign despot who claims to oppose the US elites. Who is Ramsey Clark really working for? Dynasty of Mediocrity Ramsey Clark was born to power. In 1945, the Clark family made its leap from Dallas to DC when Ramsey's dad Tom Clark, a lobbyist for Texas oil interests, was appointed Attorney General by President Harry Truman. In his Texas days, the politically ambitious elder Clark was cultivated as a useful connection by New Orleans mafia kingpin Carlos Marcello, and many feared Clark's new job would afford organized crime access to higher levels of power. AG Clark was repeatedly mired in corruption scandals. In 1945, he was accused of taking a bribe to fix a war profiteering case. In 1947, after he had four convicted Chicago mob bosses sprung from prison before their terms were complete, Congress appointed a committee to investigate--and was effectively roadblocked by Tom's refusal to hand over parole records. Truman admitted to a biographer that "Tom Clark was my biggest mistake." But he insisted: "It isn't so much that he's a bad man. It's just that he's such a dumb son of a bitch." AG Tom Clark played along with the post-war anti-communist hysteria, approving federal wiretaps on Alger Hiss, the State Department official accused being a Soviet mole. In 1949, he moved over to the Supreme Court. Carlos Marcello biographer John Davis asserts that the kingpin continued to funnel money to Clark when he sat on the high court. Tom stepped down from the high court when young Ramsey was appointed attorney general by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1967. Ramsey was likely appointed precisely because he was Tom's son. And not because LBJ was impressed with Tom, but just the opposite: Johnson knew that Ramsey's appointment would maneuver Tom into stepping down. This cleared the way for the appointment of Thurgood Marshall, a comparative moral and intellectual titan who was strategic to the White House's effort to buy peace with the civil rights movement. AG Ramsey got into a famous showdown with FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover when he attempted to block the Director's wiretaps of Martin Luther King Jr.--apparently the first stirrings of Ramsey's conscience. Hoover, considering Clark a spineless "jellyfish," went over his head and ordered the wiretaps without the AG's approval. However, Clark later told Curt Gentry, author of a critical biography of Hoover, that the FBI director had "very strong human qualities" and "was not at all evil by any means. He really believed deeply in integrity, as he defined it, as he saw it." Despite his unwillingness to approve the snooping on King (who, after all, had been a guest at the Kennedy White House), Clark was complicit with Hoover's COINTELPRO. Following the 1967 riots in Newark and Detroit, he directed the FBI to investigate whether the unrest was the result of some "scheme or conspiracy." He instructed Hoover to develop "sources or informants in black nationalist organizations, SNCC and other less publicized groups." The result was Hoover's extensive "ghetto informant program." In 1968, Clark prosecuted Dr. Benjamin Spock for advocating draft resistance. "As late as 1968, while campaigning for Lyndon Johnson in Wisconsin, Clark was shouting at anti-war protesters to take their grievances to Hanoi rather than Washington," wrote John B. Judis in a 1991 expose on Clark in The New Republic. Clark also dutifully backed the official findings that Lee Harvey Oswald and Sirhan Sirhan each acted alone in the assassination of the Kennedy brothers. But when LBJ lost in '68, Clark was iced from his farewell luncheon. The humiliated White House isolated him as King's Resurrection City protesters occupied the DC mall and Republican candidate Richard Nixon baited the AG for undermining "law and order." He had become a convenient whipping boy for both parties. Leftward, Ho An embittered casualty of the '60s, Clark assumed a leftist posture after leaving the Justice Department. He became the lawyer for anti-war protestor Philip Berrigan, headed a private probe into the FBI killings of Black Panthers Fred Hampton and Mark Clark, and travelled to Vietnam to condemn the bombing. In a 1974 bid for Senate in New York, he played the centrist in the Democratic primary, with Bella Abzug on the left and Daniel Moynihan on the right. Moynihan won. Clark, now 46, appeared to burn his bridges with the establishment at this point. In June 1980, with America mesmerized by the Iran hostage crisis, he joined a forum on "Crimes of America" in Tehran--the first of many such junkets. The '80s saw him globetrotting to schmooze with any dictator who happened to be on the White House xxxx-list. After the US bombing of Libya in 1986, he met with Col. Moammar Qadaffi in Tripoli. He went to Grenada to advise Bernard and Phyllis Coard, leaders of the clique accused of murdering Maurice Bishop, who were facing treason charges. Things started to smell really fishy in 1989, when Clark represented ultra-right cult- master Lyndon LaRouche and six cohorts on conspiracy and mail fraud charges. The LaRouchies had been bilking their naive followers of their savings by getting them to cough up their credit card numbers. Clark (who had been silent when the real COINTELPRO was conducted under his watch at the Justice Department) now charged that the LaRouche case was an "outgrowth" of COINTELPRO. He said the case was manufactured by LaRouche's "powerful enemies within the establishment" who targeted the cult because of its crusade "to combat the traffic in so-called 'recreational drugs'...and the practice of usury." Clark was echoing the standard line of the LaRouche organization, which paradoxically pleads government persecution while boasting of its connections to the intelligence establishment (uniquely merging paranoia with delusions of grandeur). In fact, the cult has exchanged information with the FBI, and farmed out its "intelligence" services to Panama's Gen. Manuel Noriega. LaRouche's 1970s campaigns for a "War on Drugs" and space-based missile defense eerily predicted Reagan-era programs. Clark couldn't keep his client from a conviction and brief prison term. But Clark's relationship with LaRouche went beyond legal representation to actual advocacy. Researcher Chip Berlet, a watchdog on radical right groups, told Judis that Clark's brief was a "political polemic." In June 1990, a LaRouche front organization, the Schiller Institute, flew Clark to a cult-organized conference in Copenhagen. His speech there claimed the US government had moved against LaRouche because he was "a danger to the system," and decried that he was a victim of "vilification." The speech was printed in full by the LaRouchie New Federalist propaganda rag. Clark also represented PLO leaders in a suit brought by the family of Leon Klinghoffer, the elderly vacationer who was shot and thrown overboard from the hijacked Achille Lauro cruise-ship by renegade Palestinian terrorists in 1986. Another Clark client was Karl Linnas, an ex-Nazi concentration camp guard in Estonia (where he had overseen the murder of some 12,000 resistence fighters and Jews), who was being deported from the US to the USSR to face war crimes charges. Clark again lost the case, but again went to bat for his client in the public arena, questioning the need to prosecute Nazis "forty years after some god-awful crime they're alleged to have committed." The Devil's Pact In August 1990, two months after his return from the LaRouche conference in Copenhagen, with US troops mobilizing to Saudi Arabia, Clark accepted an invitation to lead the National Coalition to Stop US Intervention in the Middle East. This invitation had been extended by members of an orthodox Stalinist sect, the Workers World Party (WWP). Clark had finally found a new home. The Clark-WWP alliance has lasted to this day. A brief look at the doctrinaire sect's history: WWP is the brainchild of Sam Marcy, intellectual guru at the party's helm until his death in 1998. In 1956, Marcy led the faction in the Socialist Workers Party that supported the Soviet invasion of Hungary, attacking the popular uprising and general strike there as "counter- revolutionary." In 1959, the Marcy clique broke from the Trotskyist SWP to found the more Stalinist WWP. The new group wasted little time in cheering on the brutal Chinese repression of the indigenous culture in Tibet that year (which sent the Dalai Lama and 80,000 refugees fleeing into exile). Vying with SWP and other parties for top dog position on the radical left, WWP always maintained a front group to suck in neophytes. During the Vietnam era this was Youth Against War & Fascism (YAWF). In the Reagan-Bush era it was People's Anti-War Mobilization (PAM)--which would be the operative group in the National Coalition in 1990. With glasnost, WWP supported the Kremlin hard-liners who resisted Gorbachev's reforms and disarmament moves. Insisting that China remained a "workers state," WWP supported Deng Xiaoping in the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, again attacking the protesting students and workers as "counter-revolutionaries." In 1991, WWP supported the KGB coup against Gorbachev. Yet WWP also wooed the Democratic party, supporting Jesse Jackson's presidential bid in 1984. In New York, WWP made alliances with the left wing of the Democrats to establish a foothold in key trade unions. WWP cadre Gavriella Gemma became a secretary in Clark's New York law office in 1977. In his New Republic piece, Judis suggests that Clark fell under her spell and was won over to the WWP. When David McReynolds of the War Resisters League met with Clark in 1990 to warn him that WWP was "using him," Clark refused to listen, constantly referring to what "Gavriella said." With Clark as the figurehead and PAM/WWP at the helm, the National Coalition provoked a split in the movement against Operation Desert Storm through its refusal to condemn Saddam Hussein or Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. The other established anti-war groups (War Resisters League, CISPES, SANE/Freeze, National Organization for Women, etc.) formed the rival National Campaign for Peace in the Middle East, which condemned both Bush and Saddam. Soft-peddling their pro-Saddam line, WWP's National Coalition won endorsements from celebrities like Spike Lee and Casey Kasem, sucking in numbers even after the split. The two groups held separate marches on Washington in January 1991, allowing the media to portray a divided movement. WWP went to extreme lengths to maintain control of the National Coalition. At an April 1991 protest in New York City, WWP thugs attacked a Lower East Side squatter contingent and ejected them from the rally for refusing to take down their unapproved homemade banners. WWPers then called in the police and had the squatters arrested (SHADOW April/May 1991). In November 1990, Clark flew to Baghdad to meet with Saddam, who allowed him to return with a few hostages. In February, with the bombs falling, Clark was in Basra, Iraq's southern port, witnessing the destruction. But his consistent failure to complain about Saddam's regime made it clear he was there at its invitation. With Clark's name-recognition and homespun, avuncular image, WWP had the opportunity to form a new front group to win over naive liberals. This was the International Action Center (IAC), which remains the top vehicle for Clark's ego and WWP's play for hegemony over the fragmented remnants of the left. IAC/WWP's politics went from bad to worse as Yugoslavia descended into chaos. It soon became obvious that Clark's legal work now closely followed the WWP line. In 1992, Radovan Karadzic, the leader of the Bosnian Serbs, was served with federal subpoenas when he touched down in New York for UN meetings. The National Organization for Women and the Center for Constitutional Rights, acting on behalf of Bosnian refugee women, were charging him with ordering mass rape and war crimes. Clark, of course, immediately came forward to represent Karadzic. Clark also made junkets to Serb-occupied Bosnia to schmooze with Karadzic (as did various Russian neo-fascists like Vladimir Zhirinovsky). International Action Center leaflets engaged in blatant historical revisionism over Serb war crimes, portraying them as lies perpetrated by an imperialist conspiracy. "What about all those reports of 'Serbian atrocities'?" asked an IAC leaflet in 1993, and then answered its own question: "Before the bombs can be dropped the lies must be told." It then went on to cite fabricated atrocities which the Kuwaiti regime's paid PR hacks had attributed to the Iraqi occupation forces, without offering a shred of evidence that the reports of Serb rape camps and "ethnic cleansing" were similarly fabricated. Note the subtly evil propaganda. Opposing NATO bombing is one thing. Calling the reports of mass rape and ethnic cleansing "lies" is quite another. This "anti-war" propaganda is on the same repugnant level as right-wing Holocaust Revisionism. IAC/WWP embraces what is now called in Europe the "Red-Brown Alliance"--the notion of a left-fascist alliance against the West. This alliance is most advanced in Russia where neo-Stalinists and neo-Czarists have joined to oppose Yeltsin (seen as a stooge of the West). In an echo of the 1939 Hitler-Stalin Pact, former communists and anarchists in Russia now work with figures like Zhirinovsky, who have themselves sought alliances with German neo-Nazis. Like Clark and WWP, these Russian extremists have avidly rooted for the Serb armies throughout the wars in former Yugoslavia. The "Red-Brown Alliance" was seen on the streets of New York during the 1999 NATO air campaign against Yugoslavia, when Clark led rallies which brought WWP communists together with right-wing nationalists and Orthodox priests from the Serb immigrant community. Serbian flags were proudly waved at these New York rallies, while meetings at IAC's 14th Street offices degenerated into mass chants of "Serbia! Serbia! Serbia!" This at a time when Serbian police and paramilitaries were forcing 800,000 Albanian refugees to flee their homes in Kosovo at gunpoint. Again, WRL and other anti-war groups broke away to form their own coalition that rejected both NATO's bombing and Serbian aggression against the Kosovo Albanians. But this time it was only IAC/WWP which held a national rally in DC. In October 1999, Clark met with Yugoslavia's President Slobodan Milosevic in Belgrade, and said everything the dictator wanted to hear. Milosevic, by then facing war crimes charges before the UN tribunal, called his guest "brave, objective, and moral." The case against Radovan Karadzic languished since the UN launched war crimes charges against him, forcing him into hiding in Serbia. Clark, meanwhile, represented a Rwandan Hutu militiaman fighting his extradition from the US back to Rwanda to face genocide charges. The WWP line simultaneously (and predictably) tilted to the genocidal Hutu militias as the UN wrote up war crime charges against their leaders for ordering the slaughter of half a million Tutsi civilians in 1994. What is Ramsey Clark: dupe, kook or spook? Has a well-intentioned but none-too- bright Clark been duped by the WWP cadre? Or has his reasoning become unhinged for reasons of personal psychology? Or, is he a deep-cover spook, whose real Devil's pact is with sinister elements of the US intelligence community, his mission to divide and discredit any resistance to Washington's war moves? You decide. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Israel; War on Terror KEYWORDS: EISENHOWER; JOHNSON; LAROUCHE; MILOSEVIC; OLP; QADAFFI; RAMSEYCLARK; SADDAM; STALINISTS; TEHRAN; WODLIST; WWP -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is not too recent, and comes from a leftwing website, hence the conspiracy hypothesis at the end. Otherwise instructive. 1 posted on 12/07/2005 3:35:10 AM PST by Hunden [ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To: Hunden Velily interesting 2 posted on 12/07/2005 3:47:43 AM PST by RVN Airplane Driver (Most Americans are so spoiled with freedom they have no idea what it takes to earn and keep it.) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To: Hunden AG Tom Clark played along with the post-war anti-communist hysteria, approving federal wiretaps on Alger Hiss, the State Department official accused being a Soviet mole. The left wing bias of the site came into sharp focus right about here.

"(She's) as blind as (she) can be, just sees what (she) wants to see"... For those who live in Texas, I saw a great bumper sticker the other day. A reference to Kinky Friedman: "He ain't Kinky, he's my governor" Dawn

Gerry: Joan Mellen quotes you as having said Richard Helms gave the order to kill JFK. DId you say this? Is this your belief? "Tables" Dawn

She's got us doing it again": focussing attention on her. (Tho the song list had me in stiches. "'I'm a Loser" is perfect). 12/8/80 I was in law school and that week a lot of Lennon stuff had come out: a cover story in Esquire, the Playboy interview, "Starting Over" lp, so he was on my mind as I fell aspeep that night, having just read about half the Playboy interview. Former boyfiriend- (and still good pal)- Harvey Yazijian (of Assassination Information Bureau) called me and woke me with the words " Dawn, there's been another political assassination. John Lennon's dead". My response was very primal and immediate. I could hear sreaming and it did not even feel like my own. (Later I realized that only such news about my then 7 year daughter would have affected me so vicerally). All night radio stations kept saying the horrible news, mixed with Beatles and Lennon songs. "Across the Universe" and "I'n My Life" were the ones that hurt the most. "Nothing's goona change my world" Next evening a candlelight vigil was ovserved at the Boston Common. Tears froze on people's faces. I recall no conversation, just terrible sorrow. Even by summer it was still raw for me. I remember sitting outside, crying while reading Lennon books and my land lord asking me if I was ok several times. For those of us who remember the pain we felt with the murder of JFK, the Beatles caused a renewal. A reason to smile. And the witty sardonic Lennon who would become the ambassador of world peace stood for so much of what I value. So to lose this one, to another deranged lone nut, was the epitome of unfairness. Still is. Dawn

[quote name='Tim Gratz' date='Nov 27 2005, 10:18 AM' post='46590'] Dawn wrote: Like fellow leftie -(who I otherwise greatly admire)- Noam Chomksy, these people either have their heads in the sand, or are paid off to write this crap. Any joe-six pack KNOWS JFK was killed by a conspiracy and at this time most people know why. Holland MUST know better. The usual: anyone who disagrees with my opinion is either on the CIA payroll or a fool. No room for an honest difference of opinion--even if it emanates from a seasoned left-winger like Chomsky. TG: Did you actually READ Dr. Aguilar's excellent piece above? If so do you disagree with it? Agree with Holland? What does one's "seasondness" have to do with being intellectually dishonest on the question of conspiracy?? Dawn

"Whatever gets you thru The Night" is a big favorite. "And so this is Christmas: War is over If you want it" another. "Across The Universe". Lennon's most ironic song? "Happiness Is a Warm Gun". How creepy now. But honestly I love everything this band ever did, and same went for JL. There's this wonderful sequence of scenes in the film Imagine where some kid is just hanging around outside John and Yoko's and instead of sending him off, John chats with the boy; welcomes him. FWIW I do think his murder was suspicious. The whole YMCA matter was very bizarre, which is why I posed the question of MDC being a programed assassin. Yesterday I read an article which stated that when arrested Chapman said something quite telling: "I acted alone". Dawn

Very interesting UFO interview. GREAT political commentary on today's situation, brilliant analysis of our near dictator-state. Scary speech-judge assassinated??? And typical TG would refer to anything accomplished- (or almost so)- against the defendants as "abusive". Thanx for all the info on Daniel Sheehan. Now that's a man I could really support for political office. Dawn

[quote name='William Plumlee' date='Dec 6 2005, 01:43 AM' post='47486'] GPH was never CIA or MI. He "shadows" information for personal gratification. He sponges up information and speculation and throws it out in disjointed fragments as facts and adds to that over time. The real CIA file on GPH is they in "no way" wanted anything to do with him or "his boys".., even some of the Cubans who are now dead and gone wanted nothing to do with him, but he now quotes them as buddies in arms. He has never been a CIA operative or a MI covert operative in spite of what he claims. His disinformation is of his own making. He does not work within the protocol of the jargon of CIA. He thinks he knows how operations come together and who and why they were formed. This is his fantasy. He drops names in tight circles and picks up jargon then uses it to influence others with his knowledge It works on the ill informed who want to know workings of the covert world. To say he is CIA is a dis service to the CIA and our government. People want to believe what they want to believe and GPH is there to provide the color they so much desire. A real operative works in the shadows and lives in a world of cut outs and no man lands. Its his job to protect the operation at all cost as it is being played out. Liver Lips like GPH who see others, who know what he really is, as "Snitches" could never keep the secrets because he wants everyone to see him as a big operative and planner that clears all operations and tells the CIA Director how to play the game. Covert Ops is a very small world a dangerous world of which the likes of GPH could never have survived. Do what you like with the GPH's material. I have wasted to much time on this whatever person. While this has been a fascinating thread, Gerry strikes me about as credible as any other wanna be. Gerry: Earlier I was going to start a thread asking that you post your STORY, in a mannar similar to what Tosh did last year, on this very forum. Your dangling of little tidbits demonstrates an ability to read...but you do not ever provide any documentation. Yet you have the audacity to say on this forum that Tosh has posted fake docs. For God's sake man, Tosh can be looked up. He has posted a ton of government docs. On himself. See him pissing in his pants that some military brat from 1963 is gonna come and get him?? Please. YOur name calling is not at all entertaining, just shows how utterly defensive you actually are. Either you have something of value to add, in the history of this case, or you are exactly what RObert, Tosh and Al say of you: a friggen wanna be with nothing better to do than suggest that someone ( a man no less) may want a date with you?? Grow up, and post your damn story, with something to back it up. (Ya, you sure tripped up Garrison didn't you, little big man? How utterly patriotic. Someone autta give you a medal.) Dawn ps OWEN: Love the pic!!! Brains AND curls, how utterly charming. Can I adopt you

[quote name='Pat Speer' date='Dec 5 2005, 12:21 PM' post='47399']

John, with respect,a stopped clock tells you the right time twice a day, with the amount of spam she's thrown around here, it would be posively spooky if NONE of it were on the money. BTW, be very careful when visiting her sites, some of them are very toxic, and can play havoc with your PC. Steve. Steve, Both Terry and I have discovered this too. John have you not noticed this? Could go a LONG way toward explaining why she is really here. I certainly won't click on one again. Or respond to ANYTHING she posts. What did our tongue-tied President say ? "Fool me one shame on me, fool me twice, won't get fooled again" or something to that nature. (Maybe he was a confused "Who" fan Dawn

Thanx Tosh. As always, fascinating. Now let's see GH come back and say these are "phony" documents!! Belated "happy birthday", by the way. I sure missed our buddy J this past 11/8 on his. Still hard to believe- (accept)- that he's really gone. J would always call on my birthday and say "let me be the first to wish you a happy birthday" and when I'd tell him my daughter, or sister had already called first he'd say "I'm talking about NEXT year". His wit lasted down to the very end. Dawn John: Just a note from memory: I too, was under Clines operations at one time and met with Wilson in Denver many times in the early eighties. I worked UC OPs MX for a brief time and was associated with KIKI and Shaggy. Susan Baldwin and Hector Gomez(?) two DEA agents and investigators of the time reported in a classified Secret memo on a ranch in MX that belong to Quintero. As a side bar it is interesting because it referes to the "CIA Thing" of weapons for the Contra. Wheaton knows about this. Its interesting reading.. pdf/DEAfiles.pdf]http://www.toshplumlee.info/pdf/DEAfiles.pdf

[ Hi Dawn, what I admired most about John was his humanity, and the fact that he saw fame for the chimera that it is. Chapman claimed he shot Lennon because he was a "phoney" John was lots of things, some contradictory, Phoney wasn't one of them. Steve, I agree. Chapman said Lennon was a phony because, in contrast to his "sharing all the world" concepts in "Imagine", Lennon had large mansions, so that made him a "phony". So far from it. He saw thru the phoniness of others. He and Yoko did an interview just before he died, live radio, that I have around here somplace, and it was just beautiful. Likesise the Playboy interview he'd just done. I was midway thru it when I got the call he'd been killed. In explaining the lp he and Yoko had just put out "Starting OVer" he described it as "a love letter to all the other couples who'd grown up loving (the Beatles)". I still cannot hear "Woman" without crying; "even after all these years" (Oh Yoko). RIP John, we've missed you now 25 years. Dawn

Tim: I think looking into the role of all the original attorneys in these cases is a very fruitful area of research. They all sold-out their clients! In Sirhan's "trial" his attorney and the DA STIPULATED that Sirhan had killed Bobby. As a former attorney you know this is NOT a trial, except by ambush. It's an area on which I would love to do some first hand research , when I get out from under how busy I presently am. Does anyone here know how attorneys were aquired for Ruby, Sirhan and Ray? (James Earl Ray was also talked into pleading guilty by his attorney, and if I am not mistaken-been many years since I have looked at this- I believe it was also Belli.) Dawn .

Horrible to remember this. And that it's already 25 years ago. But Tim, the date was 12/8, not 12/5. Worst night of my life, even to date. Does anyone here think MD Chapman was a MC? The evidence is murky and rather slim. The Fenton Bresler book "Who Killed John Lennon", while provocative, is far from conclusive. Dawn