The center of attention

[Dawn Meredith]

I have been watching the last several days while a few people connected to the JFK assassination have attempted to make this case ALL ABOUT THEM.
Now just why woud someone have a need to do this? Ego? Pathos?

Or something more sinister? Why would an alleged witness or researcher spend so much time keeping the focus on themselves?

This is to me indicative of, at the very least, a sense of self-centeredness that has zero to do with advancing us toward resolution of this major event in our sordid history.

Getting other researchers squabbling over minor details is such an old worn out trick you'd think that no one would fall for it any longer. Alas...it still works like a charm.

Meanwhile....Obama is seeing to it that more intel secrecy occurs...anyone noticing? But then it's not as important as someone's bruised ego, after all.

Dawn

[Jack White]

I have been watching the last several days while a few people connected to the JFK assassination have attempted to make this case ALL ABOUT THEM.
Now just why woud someone have a need to do this? Ego? Pathos?

Or something more sinister? Why would an alleged witness or researcher spend so much time keeping the focus on themselves?

This is to me indicative of, at the very least, a sense of self-centeredness that has zero to do with advancing us toward resolution of this major event in our sordid history.

Getting other researchers squabbling over minor details is such an old worn out trick you'd think that no one would fall for it any longer. Alas...it still works like a charm.

Meanwhile....Obama is seeing to it that more intel secrecy occurs...anyone noticing? But then it's not as important as someone's bruised ego, after all.

Dawn

Dawn...I assume you are talking about you-know-who.

I would be remiss if I did not point out that the scenario you
refer to surfaced as part of another big MAFIA DID IT push.
It continues to push organized crime as sponsor. The person
you speak of actually may be an unwitting pusher of this
"theory".

I think that all reputable researchers KNOW that the Mafia
did NOT do it.

Jack

[James H. Fetzer]

Yikes! I hope you are not talking about Judyth and me. Judyth has been responding to massive attacks on The Education Forum, where I have carried over those that convey the core of her position to this forum. I have supposed these posts were welcome. The attacks have outnumbered the posts I have put up here by several times--say, three or four to one, if you check it. I am finding what she has to say quite fascinating--and it most certainly has nothing to do with promoting the mafia as the principal player in the assassination of JFK. Unless I have missed the boat, many of those here have also valued what Judyth has to say. Tell me if I 'm missing something. I have even assumed that you, Dawn, were interested in these matters, but I know that Jack does not share my enthusiasm for what Judyth has to say. I have explained several times why what she has to say is important to understand what happened. In any case, these threads are nearing their terminus and we are going to shift to a blog about Judyth at http://judythbaker.blogspot.com.

I have been watching the last several days while a few people connected to the JFK assassination have attempted to make this case ALL ABOUT THEM.
Now just why woud someone have a need to do this? Ego? Pathos?

Or something more sinister? Why would an alleged witness or researcher spend so much time keeping the focus on themselves?

This is to me indicative of, at the very least, a sense of self-centeredness that has zero to do with advancing us toward resolution of this major event in our sordid history.

Getting other researchers squabbling over minor details is such an old worn out trick you'd think that no one would fall for it any longer. Alas...it still works like a charm.

Meanwhile....Obama is seeing to it that more intel secrecy occurs...anyone noticing? But then it's not as important as someone's bruised ego, after all.

Dawn

Dawn...I assume you are talking about you-know-who.

I would be remiss if I did not point out that the scenario you
refer to surfaced as part of another big MAFIA DID IT push.
It continues to push organized crime as sponsor. The person
you speak of actually may be an unwitting pusher of this
"theory".

I think that all reputable researchers KNOW that the Mafia
did NOT do it.

Jack

[David Guyatt]

Speaking personally I rather thought it to be an interesting thread. I noticed that their main home was the EF where the disagreements have been presented, and simply thought that a second more secure home (here) for those posts was chosen for obvious reasons.

[James H. Fetzer]

Thank you, David. That is another reason for reposting them here: posts have been known to "disappear" from that forum! But if Dawn really is going after me and Judyth, then I find that quite stunning: Given the massiveness of the attacks and their largely unjustified content, what would she have Judyth do? Remain silent and allow the inference that she is saying nothing because she has nothing to say? I believe in her--and this kind of attention, I dare say, is not welcome. Dawn and I clearly share different conceptions of the nature of JFK research. This, for me, has been a treasure trove of information about one of the most obscure and murky aspects of the case, namely: Lee's activities in New Orleans and how it fits into the broader scheme of things. That is both important and relevant. So I am completely at a loss as to why she would post this--to me, bizarre--attack and suggest that we should be talking about cyber warfare instead! I care about that, too, but surely such a discussion belongs on another thread. I am especially dismayed because I had thought that Dawn appreciated what has been taking place during this exchange. And, if she has better things to do, the obvious solution is, DON'T READ THESE POSTS IF YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT THEM. What could be more obvious!

Speaking personally I rather thought it to be an interesting thread. I noticed that their main home was the EF where the disagreements have been presented, and simply thought that a second more secure home (here) for those posts was chosen for obvious reasons.

[David Guyatt]

Jim, just to be clear, I regard Dawn with the greatest respect and research abilities, as I do you. I was just stating what I thought was the probable rationale behind posting the JVB material on this forum.

[James H. Fetzer]

David, Of course! Heretofore, I had assumed that Dawn was supportive of the exchange between Judyth and her critics. I did not mean to imply anything in relation to your view of her, which I share. And posts have been known to be erased there, which is an additional good reason for posting them here. But my basic reason is that, since I belong to both fora, I thought that there would surely be members here who would value access to the most basic elements of the exchange.

Jim, just to be clear, I regard Dawn with the greatest respect and research abilities, as I do you. I was just stating what I thought was the probable rationale behind posting the JVB material on this forum.

[David Guyatt]

Not that I understand the intricacies and minutiae Jim, but I do appreciate the JVB posts -- because without having my attention directed to a thread over at the EF, I just won't go there. The JFK section may be very good, but if I ever have a desire to surround myself with the prevailing attitudes that now dominates that forum, I'll simply take a trip to a porcus abattoir.

[James H. Fetzer]

David,

Believe me, I understand. It is like swimming with piranha and sharks. I
find that some of them repetitiously attack and attack the tiniest points in
an evident effort to find SOMETHING--it could be almost ANYTHING--they
can use to discredit Judyth. My psy ops expert captured their modus op
exactly in his three numbered points, which suggests that, if they aren't
ops, they are doing a pretty good imitation. Judyth and I have both been
floored that Dawn initiated this thread in an apparent criticism of us. If
that was not her point, then we would both be grateful if she clarified it.

Many thanks!

Jim

Not that I understand the intricacies and minutiae Jim, but I do appreciate the JVB posts -- because without having my attention directed to a thread over at the EF, I just won't go there. The JFK section may be very good, but if I ever have a desire to surround myself with the prevailing attitudes that now dominates that forum, I'll simply take a trip to a porcus abattoir.

[Dawn Meredith]

Jim: All I was referring to was the endless posts answering allegations by people who (allegedly) work with McAdams. Why even dignify such a thing? I have always believed Judyth and have been interested in hearing more of her story. But since you have become her backer it has become so very tedious. It really seems like she is being used. And perhaps you as well. Someone wants to silence her, for sure. We know the list of enemies she has. Let her respond in her book. Or perhaps weekly. It just appears that you are both spend all your waking hours responding to false claims made by those in the employ of the CIA. (Which McAdams clearly is, so anyone who works in tandim with him is guilty by association, whether any of them receive compensation).

It is also sad to see you and Jack arguing over a mtter that is easily solved if you and Judyth would just read the damn book. Harvery and Lee. All the time spent posting on two forums could have been spend reading this work.

I have been around the JFK research community now four decades and the infighting has always bothered me greatly. And the level of egos. People often refuse to read certain works becuse of fear that a long held belief will then have to be re-evaluated.

So that is all I was saying. I am not against Judtyh or Peter in the least. In fact it is clear that lies have been spread about each. I have made clear that it is my desire to see Peter's posts at EF restored. In the interest of history and all that is fair. But the constant harping on this and only this was becoming concerning. So I will mmob and read more selectively.

But PLEASE read H and L and quit arguing with Jack about that matter. I just do not understand how one can try to analyze work when one has ignored the work. I know Judyth cannot afford the book, so you could just get her a copy. Andy sells them for less than $100.00. I think it could add much to Judyth's own work and certainly to deeper understanding of "LHO" on both your parts.
Peace,

Dawn