Dawn Meredith

Have not trusted Judyth in a very long time. I did in 04 and tried to help her with a matter, but then began having doubts that continued. She has a need to insert herself into every aspect of this case and I now doubt she even worked with "Harvey". (Based on the work of David Josephs and phony IRS documents she has produced).

Regarding the Garrison investigation and Mary's alleged FBI informant status one of the things JImmy told me was that she actually sent him to NO as her spy to help sabotage Garrison's investigation. And he told me the reason she tried to get me to come to her house was two fold: to take a photo as she takes photos of everyone and investigates them, but...(and this is going to sound very strange I know) that she was a practicing witch, and needed a photo for this purpose. Jimmy talked about all of these things and more on several occasions. Rachel (Rendish) has talked with him about writing something with her, to the effect of growing up with Mary and her true role in the JFK assassination. Dawn Dawn

Bumping this..... Dawn

MI = Military Industrial complex? yes, i can see this. It falls in line with Carl Oglesby's Yankee/Cowboy theory, which is one of the books i was weaned on. and now i'm going slowly through R Bartholomew's UT stuff - and THAT circle of shiny people - Dulles, Paines, et al. (the Cubans and Sturgis, Loran Hall...), I'm thinking that this flows pretty well with LBJ's interests. it's a blast working through all this. Wow, Oglesby is quite the place to start one's study. Count yourself very lucky to have found this wonderful book. Carl was my very first conspiracy friend (1973) and we remained very close until his sad death in 2011. My copy of his book is falling apart but I will never part with it. (lots of mushy stuff written on the inside makes it extra special). It really connected a lot of dots and is beautifully written. Carl was the only person I have ever known who actually spoke the same way he wrote: with brilliance and elegance. It's still hard for me to believe I can't just pick up the phone and discuss the state of the case, or our kids, or today's marriage equality decision. And Richard B was my first Austin conspiracy friend. His manuscript is full of info but needs a road map to keep all of the names straight. I have not read it in a very long time. Sad that the Rambler is lost, just in case it did have a connection. All the stuff in the backseat certainly suggests some connection to 11/22/63, even if not Ruth Paine's car. And who- and why- ripped out all the pages at the Liab? This case has more mystery than any novel could ever contrive. You can literally lose decades of your life studying it. Dawn Dawn, I'm so glad you you responded - I remember that I had seen in another thread that someone here knew Carl personally, and I've been dying to remember who it was (without coming out and asking). I've sent you a PM if you don't mind, as I left topic a bit in my ramblings of Carl Oglesby. --- Darn: Not sure what the deal is with the PM system here but did not receive one from you. My email address is dmeredith@austin.rr.com. Can you resend. Thanx. Always happy to chat about Carl. Yankee/Cowboy got posted here- the first several chapters- via he and I am John Simkin for scanning it many years ago, 06 I believe. Dawn

MI = Military Industrial complex? yes, i can see this. It falls in line with Carl Oglesby's Yankee/Cowboy theory, which is one of the books i was weaned on. and now i'm going slowly through R Bartholomew's UT stuff - and THAT circle of shiny people - Dulles, Paines, et al. (the Cubans and Sturgis, Loran Hall...), I'm thinking that this flows pretty well with LBJ's interests. it's a blast working through all this. Wow, Oglesby is quite the place to start one's study. Count yourself very lucky to have found this wonderful book. Carl was my very first conspiracy friend (1973) and we remained very close until his sad death in 2011. My copy of his book is falling apart but I will never part with it. (lots of mushy stuff written on the inside makes it extra special). It really connected a lot of dots and is beautifully written. Carl was the only person I have ever known who actually spoke the same way he wrote: with brilliance and elegance. It's still hard for me to believe I can't just pick up the phone and discuss the state of the case, or our kids, or today's marriage equality decision. And Richard B was my first Austin conspiracy friend. His manuscript is full of info but needs a road map to keep all of the names straight. I have not read it in a very long time. Sad that the Rambler is lost, just in case it did have a connection. All the stuff in the backseat certainly suggests some connection to 11/22/63, even if not Ruth Paine's car. And who- and why- ripped out all the pages at the Liab? This case has more mystery than any novel could ever contrive. You can literally lose decades of your life studying it. Dawn

Larry During the 80's I enjoyed a lovely relationship with Mary, Nothing frequent, just some correspondence and some calls. She was very charming and I, like everyone in the community, had nothing but total request for her. Then in late June of 1990 I moved to Austin. Didn't know hardly anyone here. When the Roscoe White story broke BIG I had a very strange experience with Mary over the phone. She wanted me to come to Dallas and "cover they story" for her. Told me she could not get time off from work. That seemed very odd. A few days earlier while at a friend's birthday party my car was crashed in a hit and run, so it was in the shop being repaired. I did not have a car to get to Dallas I told her. (Had not yet gotten a rental). I was working at t law firm and was required to use a computer and word perfect, something I had never done before. So in her insistence that I come to Dallas, she asked me to come to her home and she would give me the word perfect program and teach me how to manage it. It all struck me as strange, she was TOO demanding and it made no sense why she could not get across town- or wherever- and gather all the information she needed on this seemingly big break in the case. I would meet Jimmy Ferrell, who was and is a good friend of Rachel Rendish, seven years later and learned a lot. (For one thing there was a specific "reason" according to Jimmy that she requested me to come to her home.) End of hijack. I have the upmost respect for Rex and her research is very valuable. I only brought up Mary herself because KK re- posted Joe McBride's own experiences and observations. Which triggered my own memories, and all the stuff her son told me on the many occasions I saw him, usually up at Jay Harrison's/.

Quote Joseph McBride Originally Posted by Joseph McBride on DP Forum Mary Ferrell once tried to recommend to me John K. Lattimer'sLINCOLN AND KENNEDY: MEDICAL AND BALLISTIC COMPARISONS OF THEIR ASSASSINATIONS as the best study of the medical evidence in the JFK assassination. I had read it, so this was one of the moments when I was alerted to her true nature as a disinformation specialist. close quote Judyth Baker discovered that somebody at the Ferrell Foundation is altering evidence: quote JVB (about her work at Reillys/NOLA with Oswald...) ...I have 11. Hired the same day, May 9, 1963, by Wm. B. Reilly as was Lee Oswald. Started at Standard Coffee, a small subsidiary to Reilly, the same day. Moved, one week later, on the same day, May 16, to Reilly from Standard with Lee. My initial ‘J’ is on most of Lee’s time cards, though two “J’s’ were recently erased at the Mary Ferrell Foundation site (the originals as in National Archives remain unchanged). close quote KK Joseph was commenting on Mary herself, not the current foundation. And I was told by her son Jimmy in 1997 not to trust her. And he gave me plenty of reasons.

Oh, please, Vince - Why do you see 1963 but deny 2001? And on the strength of this book? As I said the last time I criticized this work and one of its authors growled litigiously - Readers, judge for yourself. But do it at the library. Vince then tell me how building 7 fell? And how did a tv station in England (not positive of the place) know this would occur and so report before it happened? The evidence for conspiracy on 9-11 is overwhelming.

They wouldn't, which is why the stuff Jones and Fetzer are putting out is so crazy. I do believe a lot of terrible things about the powers that be but I don't think the Sandy Hook shooter was a "Patsy" nor was the church shooter. In my opinion.

Brings tears to my eyes. Thanks for posting Doug.

I was just about to post about this at DPF and here but first I wanted to listen to Fetzer's video on facebook. So doing was slowing down my husband's computer as he prepares for the second half of a trial this afternoon and needs to be able to quickly access his email. So without seeing any of Fetzer's evidence, aside from a FB story yesterday that the church needed repairs, I wanted to make a few comments. I find this beyond outrageous. I consider Alex Jones and James Fetzer agents now. They did the same thing with Sandy Hook and the Boston Marathon shooting. While good investigative researchers like Russ Baker and others were quick to point out many problems with the Marathon story only people like Fetzer said the victims were all actors and had no injuries, or - at Sandy Hook- not killed. While driving to court this morning the news reported that some of the Marathon victims spoke at the sentencing, and mentioned one in particular who had a prosthetic leg, and another who had lost one leg and has serious damage to the other. I also heard on the news that people were viewing the dead body of the Pastor. So does Fetzer think this Pastor is just playing dead? Or that it is a dummy in the casket? Has he flipped his lid totally or is he doing this in order to make all conspiracy researchers look silly? It is certainly unsettling to see all those who are agreeing with him on facebook. An angry young man killed black people in prayer. It happened. No one here was a "crisis actor". Dawn

Greg: JA is no guru. Unlike you he is a very nice person. I'm done here. We saw your agenda at DPF and got rid of you. So you and your followers make fun of DPF. Go for it dude. Some of us actually care about the assassination of JFK and what was done to frame LHO. I posted as I was walking out the door TO WORK/ Ya the job you seem to find so amusing. "Layer". I have the highest degree you can obtain, a JD. What do YOU do for a living when not stalking Albert Doyle. (Rhetorical question as I don't give a xxxx). Let's leave it at this: I don't think you care a damn about the truth. You can, of course, have the last word as I will not ever reply to you again.

No good acting all innocent now, Bob. That "bump" was a provocation. You know it. Dawn knows it. And everyone reading this thread knows it. I simply wanted to comment on Dr Crenshaw. It was not a "provocation". The stuff I added after that was in reference to a different thread, Bernie's comments. I am not the one posting "bump". But I was glad it was bumped as Dr Crenshaw is someone worth listening to.

In April, 1962 LEE Harvey Oswald visited the Texas Employment Commission in Ft. Worth and filled out form E-40a, Aptitude Profile Test (APT) B-1002 and the Occupational Aptitude Pattern test (OAP). This document was printed on page 491 in volume 19 (WarrenVolumes). But when this document was filled out by LEE Harvey Oswald in Ft. Worth, HARVEY Oswald and his wife and daughter were living in Russia ============= CANT WAIT TO READ IT, gaal Steve, I find your posts very hard to follow due to the big then small font, different colors. The one above is great. I hope you will continue to submit evidence that CANNOT be refuted in this fashion. I will speak with John today while driving down to court about his lack of references in this document since that seems to be a point of contention here. I know he some updated information to add to this based on a call I received from him yesterday. I am not at liberty to address it til he gets the actual physical evidence, if said person will part with it. Of course none of it will stop the anti JA posts. He could have an FBI agent on video saying "Yes we knew there were two and it was a problem we had to cope with" and the troops would still yell fowl. Dawn

As silly as I think this is, please add my name to the pro side, also Mike Hogan, who no longer posts here. I received a lovely email from him yesterday to this effect, as well as several others he for whom he bought the book and are pro H and L. So this really is just a poll of who posts here. Most of the serious researchers I know do not post on forums, and are pro H and L. So this poll is really meaningless in the long run. Dawn "As silly as I think this is" It's only "silly" because you're losing by 16-8 - a ratio of two to one. That you are actually concerned about it is shown by trying to include non-posters in the count. "Most of the serious researchers I know do not post on forums, and are pro H and L" What a slight you have just delivered to your brethren at the DeepFoo! But I'm curious, Dawn, to know who these researchers are that stay in the background. So... who are they and what happens with all the great research they do? Does it just collect dust in their garages? Is it shared privately, never to see the public light of day? Is it done on behalf of authors and/or journals - and if so, where can I read some examples? This is all very exciting! It's like learning about a lost tribe in darkest Africa! Please Dawn, tell me more! "So this poll is really meaningless in the long run." which you are desperate to win, or to disparage if you don't. We get it already! Just off the to of my head: Walt Brown, Steven Jones, Mili Cranor, Jerry Policoff, Richard Bartholomew, Lisa Pease. I did not say they "stay in the background" I said they don't post on forums. And I do consider the people at DPF serious researchers too, but I know many many more who refuse to come to forums for this very reason. Being attacked, wasting time arguing with people who will only twist their words. Or just dealing with nasty like yourself. I find it interesting that you and your forum buds make fun of me due to my profession. I am sure you have searched long and hard to try to find some "dirt" on me in that regard, but there is none. So the worst you can do is refer to the fact that I am "busy". I have no clue what your or Bart or Farley etc. do for a living. You could be a garbage man for all I know or a hit man but I would not waste time making fun of it. How childish.

He's totally credible in my opinion. Let's not forget the JAMA lawsuit which was also settled in his favor. A brave good man who finally told his true story. I read his book a long time ago and thought it was explosive. Dawn FWIW: I don't engage with those who try to bait me. In the last 24 hours Greg Parker and now this guy here. I READ Harvey and Lee. It was years ago that I made that comment. And AM not interested in reading the links Greg provided or reading his forum. And I don't give a rat's ass if somebody does not believe that Mike Hogan wrote me. I am not a xxxx. So throw your knives, I will not respond in kind. Or at all. Sorry.

As silly as I think this is, please add my name to the pro side, also Mike Hogan, who no longer posts here. I received a lovely email from him yesterday to this effect, as well as several others he for whom he bought the book and are pro H and L. So this really is just a poll of who posts here. Most of the serious researchers I know do not post on forums, and are pro H and L. So this poll is really meaningless in the long run. Dawn

Of course he has a vested interest: his own book. Same vested interest David Lifton has, if his LHO book actually ever comes out. I ventured over there yesterday and the low level of discourse was ....ah, I have no word to describe it. Nasty comes the closest. And as far as possible from "deeply political". PDS would not be impressed, I'd wager. Dawn

I agree, very little sounded credible to me as well. In particular the above, or any notion that he shot at Walker, or tried to get him to hijack a plane to Cuba. Just for starters. And don't even get me started about Files. Does anyone but Wim , who paid LOTS of money for this bogus story, believe a word of that bs? Dawn

Why am I not surprised at ANOTHER meaningless response from the man DOWN UNDER! And a Bugliosi groupie, to boot! You seeing this Vanessa? And you want John to "debate" someone who compares him to Manson? A poll? Why does Greg have such an obsession with John? It's very very odd. o he does a poll here where there are a bunch of lone nutters to begin with and declares victory. "Education" indeed.

The ones who haunt the forums are possible paid to infiltrate and spread lies. So yes their purpose is nefarious. Last week I was friended on fb by another atty - someone I do not know- and when I made my status about the assassination, he began posting stupid crap. So we got into an IM discussion for a few days, but his reasoning was circular. Warren was a good man, therefore there was no conspiracy. And argued that the media would never cover it up. So there are lots of lone nuts who remain ignorant on purpose. In my thirty years as an attorney I have seen much of this with people who have higher education. They are just so invested in the system and will not read anything that will rock their boat. Frustrating. I could not get this atty to even read an Amazon review of JFKU. It had to be a New York times review. So I gave up communicating with him. Waste of time. Dawn

I have been told by someone whom I consider a reliable source that the publisher has cancelled this book. Can anyone else confirm this? (I am no longer in touch with Joan due to some of the outrageous things she said about two dear friends, now deceased in said book) Thanks, Dawn

I have been a member here since 2004. Just because I have no use for the lone nut position does not mean I can't post here. Many post on more than one forum. Dawn

Third try: Do you agree with DVP's LN views? THAT is what I asked both times above. The question you have ignored. Dawn

That only answers the strange part, but not if you support DVP's view. Why do you not answer that question. My views are well known, so there is no reason to ask me this question. Dawn