the luckiest act in the history of the world

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Silly little Dawn wrote:

This from an unbalanced hausfrau who calls people Nazis. What nerve.

Handsome, clever PR exec whose interests include football, the Kennedy Assassination, and embarrasing the heck out of bored housewives on Internet forums."

Sadly, hate never takes a holiday. Adios, Eva.

Mr. Slattery, you are doing your LN arguments no good here. Ms. Meredith is a practising attorney, which is as honorable a profession as a hausfrau, as my dear mother was. Your posts seem to display a contempt for womanhood which is a disgrace to a real American man (or a real Irishman, for that matter).

I suspect you would be happier as a member of the Taliban, where hate never takes a holiday.

[John Dolva]

This unbridled kamikazi type sexism is deplorable. Ultimately, of course, the door will close. It helps to consider oneself in the same room as the person one attacks and then consider what to write/say. I don't think ignorance is a solution. Occasional things of worth are missed. The real world marches on regardless.

__________

anyway the topic seems to be lost in this, which, as well as decency, suffers.

[J. William King]

Silly little Dawn wrote:

What the hell are you talking about? I am no fan of the POLICIES of the present administration including the POLICIES if the AG.

Didn't ask you if you agreed with their policies. I asked if you hysterically and hatefully compared them to Nazis. Did you? Still waiting.

And quit calling me names.

This from an unbalanced hausfrau who calls people Nazis. What nerve.

At least I post a real bio.

Never bothered to look. You don't strike me as interesting.

What's your damn claim to fame around here? "PR". That really tells us a lot. Oh I know "PR: for the WC and their apologists.

"Handsome, clever PR exec whose interests include football, the Kennedy Assassination, and embarrasing the heck out of bored housewives on Internet forums."

Fortunately this forum has an ignore function for people like you.

That's right. Run away like a little girl.

So long. YOu're just another wanna be disinformationist.

Boring and paranoid. Nice qualities you have there.

They only call names. LIke you did with John G.

Nothing at all to add to the debate. Take your own advice why don't you? A hike might just do you some good.

Dawn

Sadly, hate never takes a holiday. Adios, Eva.

I realize that I'm new here, but I joined this board because I thought the members were a cut above the average internet bully mentality.

I don’t have a problem with people with opposing opinions. It’s good for discussion. But why is this guy still welcome on here????

JW

[Brendan Slattery]

This unbridled kamikazi type sexism is deplorable.

First Nazis, now kamikazes. What is it with you people and irresponsible WWII imagery? Here's the bottom line: Dawn compared the United States to the Third Reich, and no one here batted so much as an eye, save for me. You can have your differences with the Bush Admin and still recognize that this is a hideous, STOO-PID, undeserving slur. My conscience is clear.

BTW, I was the first person to respond to this thread and did so completely on-topic, point by point. I didn't ruin this thread; others did.

Edited June 25, 2006 by Brendan Slattery

[John Dolva]

Kamikazi is a concept that has entered the global vernacular, while it predates the second world war, the pilots were meant to bring destruction on their enemy. This also meant their own destruction, the response to Kamikazi contributes to the destruction of the persons ordering the pilots into action. so it''s appropriate in this context.

I agree where there is brain there also is thought and that thought can be and has been of value. The more one strives to keep it that way. The better all around. Fueling flames is just plain daft, a daftnes that intelligent persons do out of ignorance, or design. Ignorance is fixable, forgivable; design kickable.

Things have beginning, they also have continuance and at some point an end or a transformation. What rules at a particular time is personal reponsibility.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Dawn compared the United States to the Third Reich.... My conscience is clear.

I would believe that if I believed that Mr. BS actually has a conscience.

I searched Dawn Meredith's recent posts and could not find where she "compared the United States to the Third Reich." but maybe I missed it. But the Third Reich serves one positive purpose in history: It is a reminder to every succeeding generation of the banality of evil.

The U.S. has hundreds (maybe thousands, who'se counting?) of prisoners who have been held for more than two years without charge. If you care to read the Constitution, you will find that the present government has discarded it. I am a conservative, and therefore mindful of Edmund Burke's warning that the only thing neccessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

[Brendan Slattery]

Dawn compared the United States to the Third Reich.... My conscience is clear.

I would believe that if I believed that Mr. BS actually has a conscience.

I searched Dawn Meredith's recent posts and could not find where she "compared the United States to the Third Reich." but maybe I missed it. But the Third Reich serves one positive purpose in history: It is a reminder to every succeeding generation of the banality of evil.

The U.S. has hundreds (maybe thousands, who'se counting?) of prisoners who have been held for more than two years without charge. If you care to read the Constitution, you will find that the present government has discarded it. I am a conservative, and therefore mindful of Edmund Burke's warning that the only thing neccessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

Your detective skills stink, Ray. Here's what Dawn scribbled in "Historians, Journalists and Political Conspiracies":

We live in very uncertain times. Why don't Americans wake up and demand better? I am afraid they have been so thoroughly brainwashed that they really don't realize that our precious freedoms are all but gone. We have an Attorney General who should be removed but his commander-in-chief is so Nazi-like it's truly horrifying. JIm Garrison, long ago , spoke about the rise of Nazism in Germany and compared the situation

in the US to that time saying "I'm afraid Nazism will come to America in the name of national security".

How prophetic!

Game. Set. Match. And by invoking Gitmo in some sort of twisted analogy, I see that you have succumbed to the same disease. Please seek help.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

[Your detective skills stink, Ray. Here's what Dawn scribbled in "Historians, Journalists and Political Conspiracies":

JIm Garrison, long ago , spoke about the rise of Nazism in Germany and compared the situation

in the US to that time saying "I'm afraid Nazism will come to America in the name of national security".

How prophetic![/i]

Game. Set. Match. And by invoking Gitmo in some sort of twisted analogy, I see that you have succumbed to the same disease. Please seek help.

I am not afan of Jim garrison, and Dawn and I have a profound disagreement on that subject. But if Brendan Slattery was a true conservative he would be concerned about the current threats to civil liberties. Since he is not concerned, it seems, then I must conclude that he is a phony conservative.

[Mark Stapleton]

This unbridled kamikazi type sexism is deplorable.

First Nazis, now kamikazes. What is it with you people and irresponsible WWII imagery? Here's the bottom line: Dawn compared the United States to the Third Reich, and no one here batted so much as an eye, save for me. You can have your differences with the Bush Admin and still recognize that this is a hideous, STOO-PID, undeserving slur. My conscience is clear.

BTW, I was the first person to respond to this thread and did so completely on-topic, point by point. I didn't ruin this thread; others did.

It's very interesting that you display such righteous indignation at the mention of the words "nazi" and "kamikaze". What's the story?

[Christopher T. George]

[quote name='J. Raymond Carroll' date='Jun 24 2006, 12:08 PM' post='66346']

[

Besides, the weapon fired from behind the fence on the grassy knoll may have been a handgun.

Probably was. I can't see them being stupid enough to risk using any kind of rifle from a location where it could be seen.

The murder was an in- our- faces- conspiracy, but some minor precautions were taken. And utilization of a

smaller weapon for the frontal shots was one such precaution, I suspect.

DAwn

Hi all

I am not a firearms expert but it occurs to me that you could not be sure to hit a moving target at distance with a handgun. I know the grassy knoll was not as far as the Texas Book Depository, but still it would seem to me that the shooter on the knoll, if there was one, would require a high-velocity rifle not a handgun.

Chris George

[John Simkin]

I am sorry but I am in Sicily and have not had access to the forum. I have placed Brendan Slattery under permanent moderation.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Kamikazi= divine wind...plenty of wind here, precious little divinity.

[Mark Knight]

Stephen, you're absolutely correct.

I have refrained from posting on the forum in recent weeks because I found myself responding to Mr. Slattery's attacks, and thus becoming part of the problem myself.

To conduct a fair and honest assessment of the events of November 22, 1963, we first have to examine what we know to be irrefutable facts. These include:

1. JFK was shot on Elm Street in Dealy Plaza, between Houston Street and the triple underpass.

2. Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested later that day and was eventually charged with the shooting.

Other "facts" are subject to interpretation. So to conduct an unbiased inquiry, we must approach every piece of evidence with the mindset of where it fits in the grand scheme of things if Oswald is guilty, and where it fits if Oswald is not guilty...as well as where it fits if Oswald was a participant, but was not the ONLY participant, in the shooting.

If you walk in the door convinced that LHO was the ONLY person shooting, the acoustical evidence from the dictablet is suspect; if, on the other hand, you walk into the investigation with an open mind, the acoustical evidence can be given some weight...the amount determined by how much other evidence points toward a finding that there may have been one or more other gunmen.

Mr. Slattery's contentions on this forum seem to be that, while people lie, governmental agencies do not. Over the history of this nation, Mr. Slattery's basic premise has been proven to be false time and time again. The CIA has built its considerable reputation by lies. The FBI has not been 100% truthful, 100% of the time. And the US military, in Vietnam alone, told more lies that I could possibly tell in a lifetime.

So the reexamination of the evidence in the JFK assassination is, in my opinion, quite fitting in light of all we know now, especially information which was not known--or which was willingly concealed--during the WC, Church Committee, and HSCA investigations. Does it all tie in--JFK, MLK, RFK, Wallace, Watergate, Iran-Contra, Mena, and perhaps even 9/11? Maybe...and maybe not. There's a considerable number of persons behind the scenes common to many of these incidents...perhaps too many to be mere coincidence, perhaps not. That is precisely WHY we need to examine the evidence...it's called "reasonable doubt," something that LIFE Magazine was acknowledging as early as 1966.

To accept the flawed conclusions of the WC report as dogmatically as does Mr. Slattery would suggest that this forum might well be a public relations "assignment" for him, and my questioning his motives should be viewed as no more offensive than his questioning of the motives of everyone else participating in the forum. Should that comment result in my also being "placed...under permanent moderation," then so be it. Andy and John have that right, and my participation here is out of recognition of their rights, rather than in defiance thereof.

In regards to the question of the possibility of the three shots being fired from the TSBD...if one accepts the timeline put forth by Mr. Purvis, rather than the one promoted by the WC, the premise becomes infinitely more possible. And then the question shifts to whether LHO was indeed the shooter--or even A shooter--or whether that was handled by someone else.

Edited June 26, 2006 by Mark Knight

[Dawn Meredith]

Stephen, you're absolutely correct.

Mark:

Great post.

Thanks for bringing it back to topic.

And Mr Caddy, Mr Speer, Mr White and Mr Carroll:

This Slattery character has called me every rotten name in the book

but I am not calling for him to be banned.

(Actually Ray Carroll defended me, for which I thank him).

Point is we all need to re-assess just why people are here.

If it is for legitimate and honest debate, with legitimate inquiry, then we should be

permitted to continue here.

Those who are here to do the bidding of the conspirators- paid or pro bono-

should go elsewhere.

Dawn

[Mark Stapleton]

I am sorry but I am in Sicily and have not had access to the forum. I have placed Brendan Slattery under permanent moderation.

John,

Just two conclusions can be drawn from your post:

1. You are now leaning towards Sicilian Mafia involvement in the assassination or

2. You have been misinformed as to where the World Cup is being played.