Dawn Meredith

______________________________________ Ron: Absolutely the same powers that be killed all three of these men. And for the reasons you post. Dr Phil Melanson has done very good work on the other two murders:. "The Assassination of MLK" reads like a true crime novel. I read it in one day. His book on the murder of RFK (Same title) is equally compelling. Phil teaches at Southeastern U. in Mass. and is the director of the Robert F Kennedy Assassination Archives, at this university. I think John that a sep thread on both RFK and MLK is an excellent idea as there has been so much good work on both cases. Judge Joe Brown, who presided over the trial re. the testing of the alledged James Earl Ray rifle was brilliant, until he was REMOVED from the case. This trial was accomplished thru the efforts of the researchers, Ray's atty and primarily backed by the family of MLK. Sadly Ray died before he could ever be exonerated. But SIrhan is still alive and well and has a wonderful attorney who has worked tirelessly to demonstrate this conspiracy. I have watched his parole hearings on Court tv and am disgusted by them. They truly makes me ashamed to be involved in the "legal (in)justice system". But the RFK case is so simple. Straightforward. Can easily be solved BUT FOR the powers that be, and the corrupt LAPD who actively participated in the coverup. (I am not saying the entire police force of LA is corrupt, but the men who "assisted" in this case destroyed evidence and thopse who are still alive remain unindicted co-conspirators.) Dawn

______________________________________ Ron: Absolutely the same powers that be killed all three of these men. And for the reasons you post. Dr Phil Melanson has done very good work on the other two murders:. "The Assassination of MLK" reads like a true crime novel. I read it in one day. His book on the murder of RFK (Same title) is equally compelling. Phil teaches at Southeastern U. in Mass. and is the director of the Robert F Kennedy Assassination Archives, at this university. I think John that a sep thread on both RFK and MLK is an excellent idea as there has been so much good work on both cases. Judge Joe Brown, who presided over the trial re. the testing of the alledged James Earl Ray rifle was brilliant, until he was REMOVED from the case. This trial was accomplished thru the efforts of the researchers, Ray's atty and primarily backed by the family of MLK. Sadly Ray died before he could ever be exonerated. But SIrhan is still alive and well and has a wonderful attorney who has worked tirelessly to demonstrate this conspiracy. I have watched his parole hearings on Court tv and am disgusted by them. They truly makes me ashamed to be involved in the "legal (in)justice system". But the RFK case is so simple. Straightforward. Can easily be solved BUT FOR the powers that be, and the corrupt LAPD who actively participated in the coverup. (I am not saying the entire police force of LA is corrupt, but the men who "assisted" in this case destroyed evidence and, those who are still alive remain unindicted co-conspirators.) Dawn

_____________________________________________ "I believe that by 1963 JFK was a changed man". Agreed. I had been quite troubled by your "Kennedy myth" theme and how it seemed to contradict all your other writings on the man and the murder. This post now puts it toghther. We who loved JFK know that he came into power via out-coldwarrioring Nixon, that his father's money bought him votes in Chicago, Virginia, etc. BUT BY 1963 JFK WAS A CHANGED MAN. And it is this "changed man" that we love. That is not a myth, this is a fact and I, for one, am glad to see this thinking clarified in your post. Because to say he was insignificant (forget the exact word Andy used at Christmas, but you essentially agreed with this), then there was no reason TO kill him. That is what made no sense to me, having read all your other writings on this subject. I am posting this message as apposed to sending you a PM as I will be interested in other poster's response to what appeared to be a massive contradiction by you, now clarified by this new post. Dawn

___________________ Shanet, Why are you sure Sy is telling the truth? Remember, you can't libel the dead, so anyone can say ANYTHING about JFK , RFK and nothing can be done. If JFK "got around" sexually as much as Hersh states he'd have to have had three male appendices, no bad back, an additional 10-20 hours a day, bylocation ability and a totally blind wife. I am not saying the guy was a saint, but the alleged sexcapeds grow with every passing year. A good dose of character assassination sells books, and Sy had some bad press for the good dees he had done. Hell even Norman Mailer, who once hosted a huge party with every celeb, and JFK researcher imaginable and took out a full page ad in NY TIMEs to fight to keep HSCA ultimately sold his soul to pay off the IRS, with his trash LHO book. I had never liked him til that party, and the next day, lunch, but he owed the IRs, so what does he do: Sells his damn political soul. I think there's a bit of Mailier in Hersh's "Dark Side of Camelot", in fact I think there's a lot, and for a similar motive: MONEY. Just my opinion, of course. Dawn Great quote by Katie tho and probably very true. Men were pretty darn sexist back then. That's why smart women had gay male friends. (And most of us still do).

______________________________________ Tim: The fingerprint was not "planted". Or do you think Castro did this too??) And Wallace did have have security clearance. In fact he had one of the highest that can be obtained. (1. lowest is confidential, next is top secret and next is secret: Mac Wallace had "secret"!!) (source: Wallace's Naval intelligence files) Dawn

Chris: Thank you for posting this, and of course major thanks to Jim Lesar for the alert. Paul- (email to Lesar)-is correct, such questions may cause destruction of records, as has been so often done, but it's a chance we must take. Wish we had known about the deadline date earlier. I hope everyone who reads this forum faxes at least one question/comment and then shares responses on the forum. Dawn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ___________________________________________ The fax number for the CIA Director provided by attorney Jim Lasar is not a fax number but a number to someone's office. I hope that other's caught this and obtained the correct information. Jim's NO slouch so I bet this was the correct fax number until this memo went out. Dawn Don't forget to protest for peace tonight. Boycott the tv news. Anything. Remember this election was stolen. Again.

Thank you Richard, you're definitely one of the most intelligent people here, and a major credit to this community, and I greatly admire you and your opinions on everything. My grandmother turns 67 this year, and she remembers seeing Oswald get shot, and feeling so completely shocked. She doesn't remember doing anything but watching television for days. My mother was only a year and a half old at the time ( born in April 62 ), so she has no memories of it. I disagree with Bush on civil liberties, but I would not wish harm to him or his family ( including his LOVELY wife Laura, who I insist is second only to Jackie Kennedy as far as my ideal First Lady ) - and I don't think anyone here would, but my challenge to anyone is - why wouldn't you care about that? The news media today puts Gerald Posner up in a pretty little frame in their evening specials and insist, "Well, that's it, then." Later in the night, they'll talk about Britney Spears' new dress or if Jennifer Lopez is pregnant. It's FINE for them to gossip about pointless areas of the lives of celebrities ( most of which aren't even talented ), but if you even remotely suggest that a member of the government was involved in the murder of the President, you're written off as a psycho. There's a popular UK comedian called Ali G, he's a well-educated white man who speaks in ebonics and has phrases such as "Is it because I is black?" I was watching his show on American HBO, and he was talking to someone from the CIA, and made the joke, "So, back to the grassy knoll, who actually shot JR?" ( Woo for 'Dallas,' and yes, I actually do know of things that happened in the 1980's ) And the guy did a double-take and paused and said, "JFK?" This, really stunned me - the death of our President is now a joke. We, sitting here, talking about this, are considered a JOKE - but people who make thousands of dollars snapping pictures of Jennifer Aniston buying coffee are encouraged. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ____________________________ Just shows how far we have "evolved". Nic I know you're home schooled, that's why I made the joke about our school system, where you'd never learn what you know. YOur mom was smart to home school you, but as for her politics, well that's a different story. Dawn

<{POST_SNAPBACK}> ____________________________________________---- GREAT POST, PAT!!!!!!! So freaking true, so well put!!! Your post made my day, thanx. Dawn

After some Googling, I found the following written by Don Fulsom. BTW, I just love the way Liddy leads with his chin. James ***************************** Of all the illegal activities undertaken by President Nixon's secret agents E. Howard Hunt and G. Gordon Liddy, one stands out as particularly sordid — the planned assassination of newspaper columnist Jack Anderson, Nixon's arch foe in the media. Nixon-era stories by Anderson about mobster Johnny Roselli (the Mafia's liaison with the CIA) and various Mob/CIA plots infuriated the president and led to White House discussions about the columnist's murder. The plot against Anderson came to light in 1975 when The Washington Post reported that — "according to reliable sources" — Hunt told associates after the Watergate break-in that he was ordered to kill the columnist in December 1971 or January 1972. The plan allegedly involved the use of poison obtained from a CIA physician. The Post reported that the assassination order came from a "senior official in the Nixon White House," and that it was "canceled at the last minute . . . " In an affidavit about a key meeting on the matter with his White House boss, Hunt said Charles Colson "seemed more than usually agitated, and I formed the impression that he had just come from a meeting with President Nixon." Liddy admitted that he and Hunt had "examined all the alternatives and very quickly came to the conclusion the only way you're going to be able to stop (Anderson) is to kill him . . . And that was the recommendation." Shortly after the Watergate break-in in 1972, Liddy offered to be assassinated himself, if that would help the cover-up. He told White House counsel John Dean: "This is my fault … And if somebody wants to shoot me on a street corner, I'm prepared to have that done." In a 1980 legal case, Liddy testified that there even came a time during the Nixon presidency "when I felt I might well receive" instructions to kill E. Howard Hunt — adding, "I was prepared, should I receive those orders, to carry them out immediately." <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ___________________________________--- And this man has a radio show!!! Liddy I mean. (Then of course so does "Felon North" ...."Only in America" (Bit of trivia, did you know that this band- "J and the Americans'- preformed at Nixon's convention in 68?) Lobster is a gret source, and there are plenty of good writers familiar with the CIA/Media info, the problem is getting it published. I would NOT suggest Sy Hesrsh myself, but that's just my opinion. (I consider his trashing jfk book a second murder. The murder of his reputation. ) I will aslo ask around to see if anyone I know has the time and/or inclination to write yet one more JFK related piece, this time the media coverup. Carl Oglesby's articles are still valid, as are Jerry Policoff's who also wrote on this subject. Marty Schotzs covered it in three pages in his History Will NOt Absolve us. Maybe he'd write an article. I shall ask. Dawn

______________________ Nic, I totally agree with you. You are one smart 17 year old. You will be a brilliant historian. Great instincts, as well as research abilities. You're education is serving you well. (Says a lot about our school system, doen't it?) )) Dawn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ps Ron and Anitti: Good posts, gives Paul a LOT to think about. I believe LHO fired no shots that day. The print they later found on the gun was put there after he was in the morgue. There was no nitrate on his face, an impossibility if one fires a rifle. The MC is not an assassina's weapon of choice, hardly and the SBT is pure lunacy. Paul, the autopsy pics are FAKES. I know asking you to read David Lifton's book Best Evidence is too much to ask (it's soooo long) but this proof of fake autopsy photos is all in the Bob Groden video you said you would rent. Dawn

______________________ Nic, I totally agree with you. You are one smart 17 year old. You will be a brilliant historian. Great instincts, as well as research abilities. You're education is serving you well. (Says a lot about our school system, doen't it?) )) Dawn

___________________________ So well said Shanet. I think this is interesting: Paul professes "no conspiracy", yet he comes back here regularily. Why? Is he trying to convince us or himself. Hard being a Bushie and believing any of this truth. It goes against the Rush like- conditioned mentality mindset, and boggles, instead. At least you are wonderig, Paul. Dawn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hi Dawn and Shanet: As I have said in the other strings and often, this is supposed to be a debate. At least that's the title of this string in this "Education" forum. And what, pray tell, does Bush have to do with this discussion? Or is he involved too? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> __________________________________ Keep reading Paul and you will discover that there is indeed much evidence of Bush senior's involvement. Then, go back a genereation to his dad. If you are interested in a debate, do the research. It's all out there. I can't give you names of threads here as I am running out the door to work, but just google "Bush crime family". Not to say Jfk 's dad was not involved in terribly shady dealings, I would be the first to acknowledge same, but to answer your question re the Bush family I have read enough to believe Daddy Bush WAS involved. Dawn

___________________________ So well said Shanet. I think this is interesting: Paul professes "no conspiracy", yet he comes back here regularily. Why? Is he trying to convince us or himself. Hard being a Bushie and believing any of this truth. It goes against the Rush like- conditioned mentality mindset, and boggles, instead. At least you are wonderig, Paul. Dawn

Chris: Thank you for posting this, and of course major thanks to Jim Lesar for the alert. Paul- (email to Lesar)-is correct, such questions may cause destruction of records, as has been so often done, but it's a chance we must take. Wish we had known about the deadline date earlier. I hope everyone who reads this forum faxes at least one question/comment and then shares responses on the forum. Dawn

<{POST_SNAPBACK}> _____________________ My response re JFk jr and Geroge mag is above. Had a hard time posting it, darn computer problems. Dawn

_________________________-- JFK Jr. did commission an article for George on assassination theories. Unfortunately he choose the wrong person. Jonathan Vankin, who put out a very good book called "Conspiracies Cover-ups and Crimes From JFK to the CIA Terrorist Connection". This book covers the gammit and is an excellent book, with the exception of a few pages. So, JFk Jr thought he was on the right track, however the article produced by Vankin was trash and therefore rejected for publication. It was on UFO's and other equally absurd subjects. The total opposite of Vankin's book. But prior to his death JFK Jr was really getting to the heart of some serious matters: Recall he actually interviewed Richard Mellon Scaife in the Jan 1999 issue of George. Kennedy himself did this interview of the man behind the "vast right wing conspiracy". He was on the right trail. And on many of them before "his tragic death". Not to change the subject, but I must add: do some research ON this "tragic death". Just google "JFK JR and murder " and read. Dawn

______________________________________---- John Have you considered doing an article for a US entitity on this subject? Rolling Stone published the article you cite above, they might be willing to to an update. Kids read RS and need to know who and what the media really is and how it got this way. I have not looked at Penthouse mag in over two decades but they were another group that had several good articles on the nature of the conspiracy. One exceptionally good piece by Jeff Gerth on Richard Nixon and Organized Crime was published by them in 1974. The so -caled "leftist" magazines won't touch this subject, but perhaps a magazine like Mother Jones MIGHT. Worth a try, but its readership is confined to people who already know a lot of this sort of thing. It's really a catch 22, can you imagine submitting such a piece for Time mag?? Playboy might, Heff has never been afraid to take on controversey. Point being: An article that will reach the greatest number of totally ignorant Americans on who truly controls the media. Dawn

____________________________ Tim: I give up. We agree to totally disagree on this. To Robert Charles Dunne, thank you for your many words of wisdom in this thread. Well done!! And Tim, re proving Castro did NOT do it in a court of law would be as easy as proving LHO acting alone did not kill jfk. I'd love that assignment, either of them. Dawn Dawn

______________________________________---- GREAT stuff John. It makes me sick when I hear the Post and Times called 'liberal press". I have always wondered about Ben Bradlee for very personal reasons: In 1976 or so my then boyfriend, Harvey Yazijian, of the Assassination Information Bureau was on tv in a debate with Bradlee. Of course the subject was the assassination conspiracy and Bradley was just going NUTS. Even Gerald Posner can speak very rationally as he spouts his lying filth, but Bradlee became a total madman. I thought he was actually going to attack Harv physically on national tv. At the time it was "reported" that he (Bradley) just could not bear the thought of his good friend FJK being killed by a CONSPIRACY, and that was why his reaction was so personal and visceral. Your words now make total sense of that long ago tv debate. Dawn <{POST_SNAPBACK}> ________________________________--- ps. Re: Mormans. Harv had a college friend who was in 76 a veep at the Chase Manhatten bank who informed us that there were "lots of Mormans in VERY high positions at the Chase". As a result Harvey and Jim Kostman did some serious Morman research culminating in an article for one of the skin mags (Penthouse maybe) on The CIA and the Mormons. (Back in those days only mags of this nature would publish such an article)

______________________________________---- GREAT stuff John. It makes me sick when I hear the Post and Times called 'liberal press". I have always wondered about Ben Bradlee for very personal reasons: In 1976 or so my then boyfriend, Harvey Yazijian, of the Assassination Information Bureau was on tv in a debate with Bradlee. Of course the subject was the assassination conspiracy and Bradley was just going NUTS. Even Gerald Posner can speak very rationally as he spouts his lying filth, but Bradlee became a total madman. I thought he was actually going to attack Harv physically on national tv. At the time it was "reported" that he (Bradley) just could not bear the thought of his good friend FJK being killed by a CONSPIRACY, and that was why his reaction was so personal and visceral. Your words now make total sense of that long ago tv debate. Dawn

_____________________________________- I think Nic poses a very interesting question. For me the answer is mostly no. People who do research are generally not in any danger. Now if such a person stumbles onto something serious, for example whatever Jack Ruby told to Dorothy Killgalen, that's the sort of thing that got people killed. But just knowledge itself is not even taken seriously. They know who we are and I believe they actually just laugh at us. After all where have we really gotten in now 41 years? The official version is still what the histry text books teach school kids, the media is totally controlled. But your other question, about questioning the motives of ordinary people, is an even better question. I think when we study this case we hone our critical thinking skills in ways that we teach ourselves to do (vs any classroom teaching) and so as a result we do begin to question people on different levels. Then there are all the liars, paid disinformationists and con artists in this little conspiracy world which really feeds into all of this. It is this I think that can cause us to cross the paranoia line. To question "who are you REALLY?" . All the ego trips, the I- am gonna- solve- this- case- first crap we contend with causes us to wonder about people we can consider friends one day and then "who are you REALLY"? the next day. That we are here in cyberspace just adds to the mass confusion of all this. So the only people I totally trust are the people I really do know. Not in cyberspace, but in real life. Not to say I do not feel that I have made a lot of great friendships here in cyberspace. You, (Nic) for example. Because of words by you and Tim Carroll I am now playing music again regularily. (After not having played in almost 5 years). I enjoy even the debate, so long as it is not name calling and mean. (And of course I detest the disinformationists). I love the fact that the forums are introducing this case to so many young people like you and Gibson and Greg (I think). It's good to question things. Like today: Who killed MLK?? (For your answer read Dr Phil Melanson's great book The Martin Luther King Assassination.) Dawn

_____________________ John: Excellent research. It is posts like this that keep me coming back to the forums, while most of my researcher friends tell me I am just "wasting (my) time." Dawn

______________________________ Tim: You are correct, they refuse all comment on it. However I do think that the fact Scott, W's press secty., choose 11/22/03 to get married speaks for itself. Maybe just a coincidence, but it sure seemed to be a (negative) comment on Dad's book, to my way of thinking. But we never discuss his former wife or their kids. SOme things are just off limits, like a person's personal family life, where kids are grown and make own decisions. Dawn

Yes. The chapters on Texas politics are the best thing about the book. His theories about LBJ and Ed Clark may well be true. However, he provides no real evidence for this view. I would not be surprised if some of this material came from the Republican Party. (I am aware of course of what job his son has). There is not doubt that the Democratic Party in Texas between 1920 and 1968 was a den of corruption. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> __________________________________ John: I spent many weeks last year defending Barr( in the "critical community)- based upon the fact that his son happens to be W.'s press secty. Barr and their mother were divorced and the kids mainly grew up with their mother, in AUstin. Barr's work is not influenced by his son's job. Barr had been trying to get this book published a full 7 years prior to its release last October 2003. Well before W was president. Barr knows I have a great deal of trouble with all of his "faction" portion of the book, indeed we had many daily emails on this last year, and he spent two days as our guest on 11/23 and 24/ 03. He has promised me that there will be revisions to the book. But he is currently involved in raising funds for litigation, doing consultation work in New York- (based on email from him yesterday)- which occupies much of his time. I believe the litigation is centered around the HC censorship, but am awaiting further clarification from him. But yes, the Democratic party in Tx. was terribly corrupt, and LBJ began that way and continued to be so long as he held political office. Dawn

I found it very hard to believe it was possible or likely that even you had achieved the massive new allocation I had set for you only yesterday. Am I to take it from your last announcement that you have no interest in managing your uploads as I have requested? I am afraid I will be unable to give you any further space once this has gone. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Andy, I assume others are still having the same problem, because no one is posting photos. I have been unable to post any photos for weeks, and I have no posts on this particular forum containing photos. The only photos I have on this entire site are the ones in my Rear Head Wound seminar. If I have to delete those, it essentially renders the seminar useless. I guess if I have to delete those photos to post something of great importance I will, but when members request photos I may have(such as the JFK wedding photos John requested), they may be out of luck(and allocated space). RJS <{POST_SNAPBACK}> __________________________ Jack, Please don't leave. I just saw you on tv last night. An old MWKK. I had thought it was the 40th anniversary edition and I wanted to check something, but it turuned out to be the old one with You and Gary Mack and the Badgeman stuff. Also the hour on the French connection, hubby and I watched all three hours, great stuff. We want to see your images. Dawn