Dawn Meredith

[/color] Hi Ya Duke: Clever thread name. I fess up and agree there is only one solution to this and you just posted it. Thanx for the reminder. Onward and upward. Great to see both Shanet and Tosh back , same day yet. Dawn

[quote name='Owen Parsons' date='Dec 4 2005, 12:18 AM' post='47188']

I doubt MOrley is correct re the documents. They will be so sanitized as to be virtually usless. Altho that they have been locked up for so very long does make one suspect they could be quite instructive as to the genesis of this murder. I tend to agree more with the "caller". This case has been too tampered with. When you get an autopsy as bad as this, together with so many fake leads, so much time passing...it's hard to be optimistic that we will ever know the truth: at least as to who actually did it. For the sake of history I think it is more important that our history books are corrected to reflect that there is a raging controversey and that most Americans agree on who did not do it. Now the RFK assassination is the case I always thought could be solved. Sadly with the untimely death of Sirhans' attorney, Larry Teeter, I have far less hope that even a case as "clean" as this one can ever be solved either, tho we do have a good autopsy, a dr of high integrity and his expert opinion that the kill shot could not have come from Sirhan will forever stand. Dawn

You're the stalker, GO AWAY !!!! dm

********************************************************************** "The best critics who have spent their lives studying the Kennedy assassination, including Harold Weisberg, know that Garrison controlled every whorehouse in New orleans." CITE THEM THEN, YOU DUMB, STUPID, BITCH!!! And, don't waste our time with another url to that asinine site with all those goddamned pop-ups, either. Get the xxxxing books, biblio them, and put them up, or shut up! And, quit using Weisberg to hide behind. He's probably rolling over in his grave with the likes of an idiot such as yourself quoting him out of context. Put it up, or shut it up, NOW! And BTW, nobody's making fun of you. Nobody has to. You make a spectacle out of yourself, all by yourself. Nobody has to lift a finger to do a damned thing. Terry, I worry 'bout you darlin, you're just way too timid Dawn

This is a great question Mark. My daughter is 34 and she grew up ignoring her mother's "obsession" with a kind of "oh no this again?" attitude. But last summer she watched JFK with me (I was visiting for 5 days ) and afterward we had a very intense conversation. SHe was quite upset that all this happened, especially MLK and Bobby just shortly -(3 years)- before she was born. I think for people under 30 the JFK assassination is really ancient history, but to bring it to the present can make it far more real and relevent today. And she also got very scared, like your son's response. I think kids today see just crazy the world has become and when they see film clips of JFK and all that he represented and projected: hope, laughter, keen intelligence, it's a huge awakening to these kids. It sets the 60's in a context for them. Sad, because todays' kids have so very little to inspire them. Certainbly not politicans- (except for those who have heard Obama !!) . We grew up at such a unique time. I would not trade it with anyone. Dawn ps We have Owen and Nic here, so that does give me hope. If two kids here - 17 and 18, respectively are as interested and knowledgable as are they, we can see that others might be upon learning even a small amout about the true "crime of the century".

[quote name='Lynne Foster' date='Dec 2 2005, 01:24 AM' post='46950'] Dawn, why do you defend a fraud artist? Because he was NOT. And if you knew anything beyond the crap you spew based on this Mat creep- or some other creep- you'd perhaps get a clue. Lynne: Imagine, JFK blown away by his government. Then some DA decides to DO something about it. How much decent press do you think such a person will garner?? You know -i f you know anything- his office was bugged by the FBI. Far from protecting anyone, he put his career and life and reputation on the line to be trashed the rest of his life by the paid off CIA- controlled Operation Mockingbird press. I met the man. I have studied his life. You just parrot trash. Do some homework of your own little chickee and perhaps someone will take you seriously here. I am not going to respond further to youir posts, but that was a direct question to me, so I answered as honestly and directly as I am able. I am sure you will ridicule my response. But you just read little 'net articles and parrot them. Ever try thinking for yorself? Dawn

[quote name='Lee Forman' date='Nov 23 2005, 05:39 PM' post='46177'] Does anyone have an email address for Ed Hoffman? - lee Lee: Sadly, Ed Hoffman passed on a few years back. Dawn

Tim: Great post. But no matter how much logic or eloquence is offered up to Mr Gratz he will continue to defend W and his war. To compare what this president has said and done to JFK is such a right wing rip off. Whenever the administration is up to no good it manages to co-opt some Kennedy snippet as a pretext to try to justify its behavior. "Wrap it in religion, wrap it in a flag, wrap it up in anything; all the victims look the same" (Tom Garfield "All In The Name Of...") Dawn

This war is not about LIBERTY, or "the cost of freedom". That is just one of the lies told to wage this war. And the American public is finally seeing this farce for what it really is, so of course they are becoming less willing to sacrifice AMerican sons to justify a war based on deception. Dawn

I think that when Dorothy said the case should not close, she meant that the investigation should proceed, she did not mean that images of Lee Harvey Oswald should overwhelm the effort to expose the truth. Are you not observing that you are being ignored because you contribute nothing but your one note hatred of Jim Garrison? No-one on this forum is trying to cover up the assassination. We are ALL here to advance and /or discover the truth. Even when we disagree. Why you are here is the mystry. (Aside from insulting the other members and calling them names...and letting us know on every post that "Garrison was a fraud"). Bye Bye Mat-Lynne.

Tim: I think there is sufficient evidence to indict under the engaging in criminal activity statute here in Tx. All that is required is an "overt act, beyond mere preparation". It takes little to fall into this category. We called it "the law of parties" in law school, (the terminology I still perfer). But HOW TO GET someone to run who is also aware of this case is the big problem. And also someone with the integrity to actually DO SOMETHING. Keep in mind that many have died under mysterious causes; that alone would give most DA's pause. Bill: I had been hopeful about Fitzgerald himself, after reading about him, but it would be a stretch to go from the Plame matter to JFK, tho it is all tied together, sort of. However, to understand that, one would have to have a very good working knowledge of this case and how all the dots do connect to today. I nominate Ron to draft a memo to Fitzgerald, adding to his "why I don't vote" post. You never know. It is really up to us to educate people, tho when I tried to sell the idea of conspiracy to a bunch of juvenile court prosecutors this time two years ago, at a luncheon, it was met with schocked restistance. Dawn

[quote name='Tim Gratz' date='Dec 2 2005, 09:57 AM' post='47002'] Tim wrote: [ The Mafia had financial resources of its own sufficient to fund the operation. You're right Tim, BUT this was the damn president. The Mafia can only get away with so much. The entire government would not cover up such a hit. Mafia also does not explain getting the patsy in place at the TSBDB, or getting SS to stand down in SanAntonio, the motorcade changes, getting the cabinet out of the country, and a multidude of other little details to ensure success. You KNOW there was no federal law in place then, that Tx. had jurisdiction over this murder, that the body was literally snached away ....and when Jack Ruby told Earl Warren and Jerry Ford "a whole new form of government " would now be taking over, do you really suppose he meant the freaken MOB??? I know you know it was conspiracy and you cannot deal with the notion that YOUR government murdered a much loved president; or any president, but that is what a coup d' etat IS, and is what occurred in 63, imho. Dawn

[quote name='William Kelly' date='Nov 27 2005, 12:29 AM' post='46563'] Yes, that is who he asked for. I spent years trying to find him in the early 70's thru mid 80's. Called ACLU all over, including NY where he was allededly out of. But never could find him. I wanted to ask HIM why he thought Lee was asking for him, if he ever learned this, and what his response whould have been. Anyone here ever manage to track him down and ask those questions? Dawn Hello Dawn, John Abt did testify before the Warren Commission, one of the shortest testimonies on record, quick hello, who are you, why are you here? Okay, Goodbye, perfunctory interviews, just to say that they did it. More important is the book I Led Three Lives, which gets into the types of cases that Abt handled, at least the cases Oswald was familiar with. I hope somebody got to Abt and asked him the right questions because I think he's dead, though I could be wrong on that count. And Dawn, I wanted to say that I think the topic of this thread is probably the most important one on topic at this point in time, and hope we can get back to it sometime. Bill Kelly Thanx Bill. I just now thought of something. I read someplace last week that Dallas DA Bill Hill is not running for re-election. Wouldn't it be terrific is someone who gives a xxxx ran, got elected and convened a Grand Jury there, while there are people still living TO indict??? Justa thought.... Dawn

What the hell brought THIS on? John are you suddenly on drugs or something?? Sidney does one post and you rant and rave about poor Nic and Dixie? This sounds like the ravings of a lunatic....and has zero to do with this thread. Dawn

[quote name='Sidney Blumenthal' date='Dec 1 2005, 07:31 PM' post='46915'] But when a source outed Woodward to the prosecutor, his cover-up was revealed. Above all, the extent of his credulity is exposed. It is more than paradoxical that the reporter who investigated Nixon and worked closely with professionals in government alarmed by the abuses should exhibit so little scepticism about Bush. http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,...1654480,00.html SId: Welcome to the forum. An honor to have you here. Woodward's actions/ and inactions today do not seem so "paradoxical" if viewed from the perspective that his coverage of Watergate was in keeping with what Operation Mockingbird felt comfortable with "revealing". Many aspects of Watergate, such as Dortthy Hunt's 12/8/72 highly suspicious plane crash were totally ignored by Woodward and Co. I also don't believe Felt is Deep Throat. Interesting that Felt should be outed while alive, but in no condition to remember those days. Dawn

Ron: Interesting. One of my friends whom I have known since 64 was just here visiting for 10 days from Boston. She voted in 04 for the first time in her life. She is not at all political and after agreeing to view "Executive Action" with me on, 11/22, we talked about the issue of voting, and "why do ( I ) still care about who killed JFK after 42 years?". She informed me that she will not ever vote again, for the exact same reasoning you just listed above, and, upon learning the details of the assassination and how it realtes to today only augmented her reasons. As sad as it makes me feel I find myself in 100% agreement with you. (And Dianne). With one exception: George McGovern, for whom I traveled the country and worked in his presidential bid in 72. I see now how naive I was, but at 22, with a total crook as our opposition, I honestly thought America would choose a good decent man over Tricky Dick. Man, was I wrong. 63 really was it. The coup was total and that IS the answer to Dianne's question: Not to care means they win: forever. We must at least attempt to attain justice. Dawn

[quote name='Pat Speer' date='Nov 30 2005, 10:09 AM' post='46865'] Schiller is intriguing. Did you read his book on the Simpson trial? One of his main sources, strangely enough, was a fellow ho who was paid 100k to say that O.J.'s cuts were inconsistent with a prolonged knife fight. The same ho who confirmed the single bullet theory and insisted there was no evidence for a second shooter in the Kennedy case... Dr. Michael Baden. Presumably, they met on a street corner somewhere and swapped some stories between tricks. Pat, Bill (etc) I read Schiller's OJ book and found it to be pretty well written. But don't even get me started on "whores" Baden or Mailer. In 1978 or so, when HSCA was running out of $ and about to go out of existence, Mailer was still a good guy. He threw a huge fundraiser at his NY home and all the critics were invited. Carl Oglesby was the guest of honor. It was guite the evening. The next day Mailer had us- (the Assassination INformation Bureau and girlfriends of)- over for lunch and he was most gracious and adament about the innocence of LHO. So when he wrote his pro LN book I was astonished at his selling out. Carl told me that Mailer owed the IRS a lot of money, as if this could possibly absolve him of prostituting himself on this case. I remember during the HSCA hearings seeing Dr Baden telling the panel that the "magic bullet" was "very flattened" and "could" have done all the damage that darlin arlin had attributed to CE 399. I have disliked Baden since and consider his opinion on anything worthless as a result of his innane HSCA testimony. Whores indeed. (Or as the late great Jim Garrison wrote to me in 1986, speaking of such people: "prostitute is too good a word") Dawn

Bravo David Talbot! Great review. I had strong suspicians this book was full of disinformation from the moment it was described to me. And if Liz Smith- that great insightful political commentator- says it's "the last word on the" assassination issue, then the book MUSt be on the right track It is truly awesome seeing some of these online journalists becoming so awre of the intricacies of the assassination so as to be able to write such a thoughtful review. Dawn

My response to both these shootings was a study in opposites: with JFK I was young (14) and still quite innocnet, so when I heard the president had been shot I ran home, praying all the way. I suspected conspiracy from the start. So by the time Bobby was shot I did not even bother to pray. I knew he'd die, I knew there were be a "lone nut" framed, and I knew Bobby's death would be at the hands of his government. Dawn

[quote name='Tim Gratz' date='Nov 30 2005, 05:59 AM' post='46840'] Robert Charles-Dunne wrote: What an interesting world you must live in, Tim. Killing civilians for no apparent purpose passes muster with you, but to suggest that it is wrong shows one's "temerity" and is deemed "outrageous." Your "outrage" is as misplaced as your patriotism. Killing civilians for no apparent purpose? An incredible assertion, sir. If there is any other member of this Forum that believes that American soldiers are killing Iraqi civilians for no apparent reason let them rise in defense of Mr. Charles-Dunne!! Are you KIDDING Tim? I daresay just about everyone on this forum- save you- holds the same view as Robert on the "killing of Iraqi civillians for no apparant reason". (Oh and Mr Purvis, and G Hemming, of course). Pray tell what on earth did the Iraqi civilians ever do to US to deserve having their country bombed to shreds??? Oh ya, I forgot, we go to war for the cause of peace. We bomb innocents so we can teach them to be "democratic". You probably still believe Tricky Dick was "not a crook" too. Dawn

The documentation has been overwhelming and you know it. But have YOU read it? Richard Clark et al? But I long ago noticed that for people on the far right, documentation does little or nothing to change their thinking. They would rather believe their good "Christian" president than all the documentation to the contrary. As to what ever book you quoted, no I don't have it. Nor do I have your 7 or so hours a day to read. I just finished a long 3 day trial late yesterday and am just getting back to the forum. But I have read on this subject ex- councellor and have watched the news and it all points to one thing: the administration fudged the facts to go into Iraq. But NOTHING will ever convince you that this administration is one of fraud, and will manufacture "evidence" to invade any country it feels is in need of a "preemptive strike". God save the planet from W and his band of .......(there are a number of words I could insert here, but I am not going to ARGUE with you TIm. ) The counrty is finally waking up to the horrendous error made on 11/2/04 when this guy was "elected". Last time I checked his believability and popularity were in the 30's. Dawn