Dawn Meredith

____________________________ Yes Shenet, "conflicting orders" the usual "order" to protect the president's life at all cost, which is their job description, and the real order that day re JFK, from Col. Lumpkin and whomever above him. Greer's "performance" that day cannot be explained in any other fashion. As you pointed out when one hears gunfire pure instinct says "run" not "stop". Something/someone "overrode" Greer's normal "fight or flight" instinct that day. I think it very interesting that Secret Service is no longer under the Treasury Department's jurisdiction, but under the controversial "Homeland Security" dept. I sure feel "secure" living under Patriot Acts 1 and 11, don't you? Dawn

Shanet: That says it all!!! Of course HSCA was a re-run of WC with the added bit of the mob did it thrown in for good measure, to make it look like they actually accomplished something in all those years. They left it to the AG's office to investigate further. Ha. Like the government is ever going to investigate itself. We need a Grand Jury NOW. Dawn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ______________________________________________________________ Thank You Gary Mack for the PM yesterday conceding that ITek IS CIA- connected and that this is well known. Glad we got THAT one straightened out )). A simple misunderstanding on you part. I accreciate your imput and your clarification on this. Dawn

Shanet: That says it all!!! Of course HSCA was a re-run of WC with the added bit of the mob did it thrown in for good measure, to make it look like they actually accomplished something in all those years. They left it to the AG's office to investigate further. Ha. Like the government is ever going to investigate itself. We need a Grand Jury NOW. Dawn

To Gary Mack: I don't give a hoot who took Badge Man to ITEK, whether it was you (as you said) or the damn Pope. When I did my paper in 1975 do you really think all the ties of ITEK-to-CIA came from just "one book"--a book that I should now just "throw away"? Really Gary. Your PM's to me border on such immaturity, and then add further insult by continually having Bill Miller come in and post for you. When I have more time I will cite all of the sources I used in my paper, demonstrating ITEK's CIA connections, but rest assured there were several. I would never make such a statement in a college paper based on the opinions of just "one book." That was your assessment of my work and you are simplly wrong. In fact Dan Rather mislead the public several times in this particular "docudrama." One of the lies was that this was the first time ITEK had even studied the Zapruder film, when in fact it was their third such study of this film, the first two being for UPI and Life. This is according to Dick Russell, writing then for the Village Voice in an article titled "JFK Assassination Probe: CBS leaves a Skeptic Skeptical" (New York, 12/10/75). Dan's most outrageous claim in this particular presentation concerned the headshot and the backward head motion of JFK: Dandy Dan told his audience that "Jackie did it" (pulled her husband backwards). I do not have the time to rewrite my 1975 paper on this forum. Dawn Meredith

Tim, I contacted the director Mark Sobel last summer, regarding posibilities of viewing/purchasing this film. Here's his reply: "Hi. The film will be playing the fall film festivals, and hopefully will attract a distributor. No plans for video release at this time. Keep checking the site for info. Thanks, Mark. " Haven't seen it but would like to asap. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> _________________________ Is this film about the Warren Commission, by chance? thanx, Dawn

Jack - go remove some of those Apllo images that you posted and it will free up some forum space for you to put the more worthwhile images on here. When I ran out of space in the past, that is what I did ... I chose images from past post and deleted them to make room for new ones. Bill <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ________________________________ How does superimposing images of ANYONE's face over "badge man" advance this case in the least???? Show us the unedited photos of Badge man or show us nothing, this is just ridiculous. Someone please bring back Classic gunman photos, as I recall they were UNEDITED, with No one's face superimposed and it was very clear to both my self and my husband that this was some serious photography. And then when I read that Itek studied thiese photos and had disagreed all I could do was laugh. Itek is CIA from the beginning. (I researched them in 1975 for a paper I did critical to a CBS "docudrama" on the Kennedy assassination. At that time Itek was commissioned by CBS to study the Zapruder film).

Gary: You and other people keep bringing up issues that I have not mentioned in this forum. In an American court of law, if an attorney for one side brings up a particular topic, then discussion on that topic is fair game for the opposing attorney. Why did you mention Holocaust Revisionism? Are you willing to discuss it? If this were a court of law, your comment would make the Holocaust a topic of open debate. So I will put it to the moderators. Will you (moderators) grant me permission--in advance--to start a discussion thread about Holocaust Revisionism? The main topics of discussion would be as follows: - Is the death count (six million Jews) accurate? - Were gas chambers the primary means of killing inmates in Nazi camps? Seriously, I do not expect the moderators to allow such a discussion, regardless of any evidence I might produce. But sometimes making a request is just as important as the response received. I only ask the question because Mr. Buell introduced the topic of the Holocaust as a means of discrediting me. But if given an opportunity to back up his comments with evidence, I have every confidence that he would suddenly fall mute. Regards. Salvador Astucia <{POST_SNAPBACK}> -Yes it is accurate -No that is not the only way the prisoners were murdered. Most prisoners from the Eastern Front were simply shot and buried in mass graves Since when has Holocaust Denial had a place on this forum? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> _____________________________---- Holocause denial is NOT welcome on this forum, nor is any form of hatred, period. I'm with Gibson , Shanet and Gary. You are not going to "GET a green light" here, find another forum to post your venom on, this one is for EDUCATION not disinformation. And this forum specifically is re the assassination of JFK and that debate. If you like Hitler there are plenty of hate forums for you I am sure. Find one. Shanet: Ignore this person and he will go away, continue to "debate him" and he will continue this ugliness. He's here ONLY as a diversion. As are, sadly, some others. Dawn

_____________________________ Steve: I will ask. I am in an all day long continuing legal ed class for the next 3 days, 8-5 an hour north of me, so may not get to post much, but will ask re this. Also, I did not post that last entry 3 times on purpose, when I tried to post it I kept getting "that page cannot be opened" showing that the site may be down, but I wanted this to be posted as I am about to walk out the door to my class. Sorry. Dawn

_____________________________ Steve: I will ask. I am in an all day long continuing legal ed class for the next 3 days, 8-5 an hour north of me, so may not get to post much, but will ask re this. Also, I did not post that last entry 3 times on purpose, when I tried to post it I kept getting "that page cannot be opened" showing that the site may be down, but I wanted this to be posted as I am about to walk out the door to my class. Sorry. Dawn

___________________________ Shanet and Steve, I was given some information on this matter of lack of security recently: Some time back, on a different thread someone asked if there was any source aside from Prouty as to any official "stand down" order. There is now, but he's "off the record" at this time:Lumpkin, I was told, had far more power then was hereto fore known. It was he who told Reserve Ltd. Whitmore and other necessary men (out of San Antonio) that their services would not be required, in other words " To stand down". Lumkin, had this authority "over the entire state of Tx" . More later as I learn same from an unnamed source who was there, and in a capacity to know these matters. Dawn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ps opps Sorry about typo, meant to say "Whitmayer". <{POST_SNAPBACK}> _______________________________ Further Clarification: Lt. Col Whitmeyer, who was Commanding Officer of the Northern District of Tx. actually gave the "stand down" order, But Col. Lumpkin, who was the highest ranking reserve Col., (military intelligence), for the state of Tx., was Whitmeyer's boss, and as such had to have (1.) given Whitmeyer said stand down order and was (2.) probably acting upon orders from a higher "G-2" in Washington. Lumpkin, who died 7/15/94 never testified before the WC, even tho he was also Dep. chief of Dallas police, and driver of the JFK "pilot car". He did testify before HSCA 11/3/77. Lt. Col. Whitmeyer (misspelled in Crossfire) died 4/18/78.

___________________________ Shanet and Steve, I was given some information on this matter of lack of security recently: Some time back, on a different thread someone asked if there was any source aside from Prouty as to any official "stand down" order. There is now, but he's "off the record" at this time:Lumpkin, I was told, had far more power then was hereto fore known. It was he who told Reserve Ltd. Whitmore and other necessary men (out of San Antonio) that their services would not be required, in other words " To stand down". Lumkin, had this authority "over the entire state of Tx" . More later as I learn same from an unnamed source who was there, and in a capacity to know these matters. Dawn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ps opps Sorry about typo, meant to say "Whitmayer". <{POST_SNAPBACK}> _______________________________ Further Clarification: Lt. Col Whitmeyer, who was Commanding Officer of the Northern District of Tx. actually gave the "stand down" order, But Col. Lumpkin, who was the highest ranking reserve Col., (military intelligence), for the state of Tx., was Whitmeyer's boss, and as such had to have (1.) given Whitmeyer said stand down order and was (2.) probably acting upon orders from a higher "G-2" in Washington. Lumpkin, who died 7/15/94 never testified before the WC, even tho he was also Dep. chief of Dallas police, and driver of the JFK "pilot car". He did testify before HSCA 11/3/77. Lt. Col. Whitmeyer (misspelled in Crossfire) died 4/18/78.

___________________________ Shanet and Steve, I was given some information on this matter of lack of security recently: Some time back, on a different thread someone asked if there was any source aside from Prouty as to any official "stand down" order. There is now, but he's "off the record" at this time:Lumpkin, I was told, had far more power then was hereto fore known. It was he who told Reserve Ltd. Whitmore and other necessary men (out of San Antonio) that their services would not be required, in other words " To stand down". Lumkin, had this authority "over the entire state of Tx" . More later as I learn same from an unnamed source who was there, and in a capacity to know these matters. Dawn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ps opps Sorry about typo, meant to say "Whitmayer". <{POST_SNAPBACK}> _______________________________ Further Clarification: Lt. Col Whitmeyer, who was Commanding Officer of the Northern District of Tx. actually gave the "stand down" order, But Col. Lumpkin, who was the highest ranking reserve Col., (military intelligence), for the state of Tx., was Whitmeyer's boss, and as such had to have (1.) given Whitmeyer said stand down order and was (2.) probably acting upon orders from a higher "G-2" in Washington. Lumpkin, who died 7/15/94 never testified before the WC, even tho he was also Dep. chief of Dallas police, and driver of the JFK "pilot car". He did testify before HSCA 11/3/77. Lt. Col. Whitmeyer (misspelled in Crossfire) died 4/18/78.

___________________________ Shanet and Steve, I was given some information on this matter of lack of security recently: Some time back, on a different thread someone asked if there was any source aside from Prouty as to any official "stand down" order. There is now, but he's "off the record" at this time:Lumpkin, I was told, had far more power then was hereto fore known. It was he who told Reserve Ltd. Whitmore and other necessary men (out of San Antonio) that their services would not be required, in other words " To stand down". Lumkin, had this authority "over the entire state of Tx" . More later as I learn same from an unnamed source who was there, and in a capacity to know these matters. Dawn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ps opps Sorry about typo, meant to say "Whitmayer".

____________________________ Interesting "theory" but I concur, utter nonsense. Onassis did not off JFK. Just one more online piece of disinformation. Ask yourself one question: Why would Jackie marry the man who had her husband murdered??? Do you think she was too stupid to not know that a domestic conspiracy had killed her husband: Remember she REFUSED to change her clothes that day, so unlike Jackie, she also refused to leave her dead husband's body. And after Bobby was killed by the same forces, she stated that her children were no longer safe in the US, in her opinion. Then she married Ari. She knew, and she was, sadly, correct about her children not being safe. Dawn

___________________________ Shanet and Steve, I was given some information on this matter of lack of security recently: Some time back, on a different thread someone asked if there was any source aside from Prouty as to any official "stand down" order. There is now, but he's "off the record" at this time:Lumpkin, I was told, had far more power then was hereto fore known. It was he who told Reserve Ltd. Whitmore and other necessary men (out of San Antonio) that their services would not be required, in other words " To stand down". Lumkin, had this authority "over the entire state of Tx" . More later as I learn same from an unnamed source who was there, and in a capacity to know these matters. Dawn

____________________________ Ron: Very interesting on the who did Hoover testimony. As I said earlier to Shanet, my personal feelings at the time was that it was the same person who did Dorothy Hunt and tried to do Geroge Wallace. Nixon. My feeling was that Nixon and Hoover were becoming very competitive and Hoover was not used to anyone keeping the kind of tabs on everyone that he did, now suddenly Tricky Dick is doing the same thing and this irks Hoover. They argue, the prez decides it's time Hoover be "retired". Of course this was all PRE Watergate, and that little set -up by McCord and the boys really changes the mix there. So Ron, your response is most compelling....mmmm who killed Clyde's boyfriend? (Does this need its own thread ) Dawn ps GREAT stuff on Morales, and just when I need it too. Thanx guys!!

Nic I could recomeend that you order a Dallas street atlas from Amazon. I cant' find my copy right now to give you the name. Or you could get the DELORME TEXAS ATLAS and a Street map in a convenience store... [i posted one scan of mine on another thread called Dealey Plaza Map} <{POST_SNAPBACK}> __________________________ Nic I will make some inquiries and get back to you. Dawn I could go into a store around here and buy a Dallas street map, but I can't find street names for the Texas Theater, and I USED to have it around here somewhere, but my memory's shot due to stress ( waiting on SAT scores and recovering from a 2nd-degree burn on my foot ) and my room's a current mess due to scrambling to find a lizard that was hiding underneath my dresser. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> <{POST_SNAPBACK}> _________________________________ Sorry I posted within your post, in a rush, but the map posted looks pretty good too. Dawn

___________________________ Tim: No, the speech is way too long to "summerize" even just the 5 pages that I scanned would take me hours to type and I do not have this kind of time. Why can't you just get the book from the local liab and read the entire speech? A few minutes ago it occurred to me that all the time we spend here on forums is ( for me) taking away greatly from time spent reading BOOKS. Books are "permanent " forums are not. I have been trying with little success to re-read "The Man on the Grassy Knoll" (John Craig and Philip Rogers) for about two weeks now, and so I am really rethinking the value of this whole forum thing. If people refuse to read books, especially books that can educate, then what is the point of this "debate"? For me, none. I have contacted Marty Schotz to see if he can send me a better version of the speech, he has made some suggestions that I will try, but really, it would be so much simpler if you would just read it yourself. Unless of course you just do not want to know, that you are totally wedded to the idea that Castro did it, and no matter HOW much evidence to the contrary is produced, you will persist in this view. It is NOT a "self-serving " speech. But you won't know this unless you read it. John sent me a PM re my scanning of the 5 pages, asking me to cite where it can be found. I have done so now at least four times. Dawn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> _____________________________________________---- ps I will just guote one or two sentences then I have a day job to go to: In summary ( a tiny bit) Castro is upset at JFK 's death and referes to it as "serious and bad news". As to foreknowledge? Such a notion came to him via something he READ. And he cites what it was, a speech given by one "editor" named Carbo "who is director of the Executive Council of the Inter American Press Assosiation-which is a very important job in the intellectual sectors of reaction and the oligarchy..." " Something in this speech drew my attention" states Castro, on 11/23/63. The statement which "drew (his) attention reads: " I believe that a coming serious event will oblige Washingto to change its policy of peaceful co-existence" "What does this mean?" asks Castro, "when he said this three days before the assassination of Kennedy...in a cable that is not from Prensa Latina, but from Associated Press, dated Nov. 19th AP Num 254 November 19, Miami Beach... what did this gentleman mean by 'a coming serious event will oblige Washington to change its policy of peaceful co-existence'?.... Was there perhaps in certain civilian and military ultra-reactionary circles in the United States a plot against President Kennedy's life?" The speech is very long, and very detailed, about all that Kennedy had done to try to BRING ABOUT PEACE with both USSR and Cuba, and how, in Castro's opinion, this was greeted with open hatred and hostility by the ultra right war machine. Dawn

___________________________ Tim: No, the speech is way too long to "summerize" even just the 5 pages that I scanned would take me hours to type and I do not have this kind of time. Why can't you just get the book from the local liab and read the entire speech? A few minutes ago it occurred to me that all the time we spend here on forums is ( for me) taking away greatly from time spent reading BOOKS. Books are "permanent " forums are not. I have been trying with little success to re-read "The Man on the Grassy Knoll" (John Craig and Philip Rogers) for about two weeks now, and so I am really rethinking the value of this whole forum thing. If people refuse to read books, especially books that can educate, then what is the point of this "debate"? For me, none. I have contacted Marty Schotz to see if he can send me a better version of the speech, he has made some suggestions that I will try, but really, it would be so much simpler if you would just read it yourself. Unless of course you just do not want to know, that you are totally wedded to the idea that Castro did it, and no matter HOW much evidence to the contrary is produced, you will persist in this view. It is NOT a "self-serving " speech. But you won't know this unless you read it. John sent me a PM re my scanning of the 5 pages, asking me to cite where it can be found. I have done so now at least four times. Dawn

___________________________ Shanet: While I totally agree with you re Skull and Bones, I would hardly call Gahlen a "pawn". He was the person chosen by our government, Hitler's top spymaster, brough here in the uniform of a US General on 8/22/45, met with "Wild Bill" Donavan (Of OSS) and Dulles, in secret, and basically offered his knowledge of intelligence on certain conditions, inter alia: 1. complete automony over its activities, 2. his intelligence operation could only be used against Russia, (our former ally in Wold War 11) 3. ability to control the intell. of the new German government, once it was established, and 4. he never be asked to do anything against "German interests". That hardly qualifies him as a "pawn", tho as I said I totally agree with your Skull and Bones analysis. More than one evil power that was/is put the CIA together. Dawn

Tim: I have noticed that in most cases people do not confess to a murder, so the likihood of (1.) a confesion by (2.) a person who has murdered someone by (3.) causing a heart attack is highly improbable. Perhaps we may one day get a deathbed confession from such a person, but generally people who have confessed to any "murder" in this case are fruitloops like Easterling (Hunry Hurt's Reasonable Doubt), or Mob liars (IMHO). But, as you have wisely noted, many witnesses in this case end up suddenly dying of "heart attacks". Shanet: Hoover also had no autopsy. Very suspicious death, and it was in '72 right around the time of the Watergate breakin. I have my suspicions of who did it and why. Dawn

___________________________ Tim: It was suggested on another thread that you read an article by Jim DiEugenio re Exner mess. I suggest you actually read the entire book, The Assassinations, JimDiEugenio and Lisa Pease. You spend an awful lot of time on this site pushing the Castro did it and other scenerios, then you spend a lot of time reading the great responses of John and the WONDERFUL Mr Dunne (sp?). I see that you and he are in agreement that Gary Underhill did NOT "commit suicide", with the wrong hand., so that's progress. I have unsuccessfully tried to post a portion of the speech Castro made on 11/23/63. It is very long so I was only trying to scan the first page and then 3 other pages, as they are relevent to show that not only did Castro not kill JFK, he pretty much knew who did. (But my scanned copy was not printable for some reason, connected to a software problem/feature my computer seeems to lack). The full speech can be found in Dr Martin Schotz book "History Will Not Absolve Us". If you are turly interested in truth and a healthy debate I would love to hear your response after reading this speech and JIm and Lisa's book. Both can be ordered online, or directly from the author. Just a suggestion... Dawn

_______________________________________- Great stuff on this and other threads. On the "are researchers weird" thread I proposed that readers on this forum pick a memember of Congress, or perhaps two members and write to them. I now specifically propose that we utilize this particular thread, and the earlier one where John lists the CIA -owned media "assets" and EDUCATE our government. Keep in mind folks that W got Patriot Act passed very quickly and that the members of of Congress passed it without even reading it!!!. Now we have that and Pat. 11. If our elected representatives do not even read the legislation they pass, what good are they to us? No good, but leaving us vulnerable to the total dismantling of the US Constitution. We must quit fooling around arguing about the number of shots here on the forum and educated our elected representatives. Bombard them with mail. Someone reads this, even if just a secty, at least it gets to someone who is close to the elected official. And it will get a response. Dawn

... that's all I was trying to suggest. Some of it's really strange, and some of our students simply haven't had the training to spot the difference between genuine research and the other stuff. A couple of years ago, one of my 9th Graders was researching Hitler and the Holocaust and came up with David Irving's website. He just didn't know enough to challenge what he read. All I'm saying is that we need to do a better job helping them develop the skills they need to make intelligent distinctions. I'm certainly not saying that these "conspiracies" shouldn't be investigated, just that 14-year-olds don't have the knowledge base or sophistication to judge the results... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What is really needed is a collection of the facts suggesting a conspiracy, not all the hype and innuendo, no speculation or opinion. Unfortunate that many researchers see their opinions as fact. There are excellent dissertations on the medical evidence, the single bullet theory, the photographic evidence, CIA involvement, various testimonies, etc. From what I've seen of the 85% in the US who believe in a conspiracy, they also have no clue as to the facts, or have a distorted view of the facts. There are many on line seminars here that are outstanding, and there are others that stretch the imagination. I don't think the actual assasination was carried out by a far reaching conspiracy involving every imaginable cross section of American life. In my opinion it was rather small and clandestine operation. The coverup however, became rather involved in order to protect those agencies and assets in the government that took part. I agree that most 14 year olds don't have the knowledge base to judge, but then again, neither do many adults. RJS <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ________________________________ Richard and Mike: I think in order to educate the public we have to do several things; 1. Cease all arguments on who did it, how many shots were fired, and all the fringe stuff , like UFO's, stay clear of the lunatic fringe element. 2. Whether it was CIA or LBJ or NWO it was NOT LHO!!. 3. EXPLAIN in detail exactly what had to occur for the SBT to be "real", the utter impossiblity of this, with a photo of CE 399, and finally 4. Explain two things that happened to change our government pre JFK: 1. The creation of the CIA by Reinhart Gahlan and all that this caused. 2. Operation Mockingbird: The CIA total control of the media. If we can get people to understand all of this, then they will know that their government lied to them and how they did so. WE must do this. The government is NEVER going to. The media is NEVER going to, so it is us to us, "we the people". I fully support the efforts being made for the creation of a Grand Jury. That is what we need to focus our efforts on. (IMHO) Dawn I also think that we should each pick a member of both houses and write letters to them. You might be surprised at the responses you receive. I have spent my adult life doing this and one of my favorite responses is from the great Frank Church.

_________________________________________-- What about the people who are "still with us" who did not observe the rules and resorted to name calling and profanity? What about the Paul Tequala's (sp) who ask the same LN question repeatedly? Or the Tim Gratz insistance that Castro did it, regardless of the evidence against this, which John has pointed out, as had "some who are no longer with us" before that? So, we who care about this event are obsessive. I don't mind being called either "weird" or "obsessive" when it comes to trying to solve this case. Personally I think it's the people who don't care about this who are "weird", but I don't blame them when the CIA- controlled media has so successfully cover-up the truth. Dawn