+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html)
+--- Thread: Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile (/thread-3232.html)
Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile - James H. Fetzer - 26-04-2010
Good post, Monk. I case you missed my #1555, which is found on page 104, here is what
I had to say about John Simkin and his remarks in denigration of Gerald Patrick Hemming:
More surprising is that John Simkin would involve himself in this thread for the third or the
fourth time. I was just a bit taken aback by his last intervention, in which he stated--quite
categorically!--that Gerry Hemming is a disinformation agent. Since Hemming has threads
that are archived on this forum and characterizations like that one are supposed to violate
forum rules, I suppose he should have been censored by his own moderators. Others who
know vastly more about the assassination, such as James Richards and Noel Twyman, for
example, have found Hemming to be extremely reliable. The longest chapter in BLOODY
TREASON (1998), for example, is devoted to Hemming. If Hemming had disputed Judyth's
authenticity rather than endorsed it, I imagine he (Simkin) would have said nothing. That
he praises Jack's posts on this forum speaks volumes about his knowledge of this thread.
![[Image: JFKhemming16.jpg]](http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKhemming16.jpg)
[quote name='Greg Burnham' post='190635' date='Apr 24 2010, 01:07 AM']
[quote name='John Simkin' post='190387' date='Apr 21 2010, 11:08 PM']
[quote name='Greg Burnham' post='190386' date='Apr 22 2010, 06:44 AM']
For what it's worth, HEMMING believed her. And HEMMING was a hard case--a difficult man to convince of anything. He was probably tougher than most skeptics could ever be. He wouldn't have asked me to give her the time of day otherwise.[/quote]
Hemming did know a lot but as one CIA insider told me, he was paid by the word. Hemming was one member of the Forum who was a disinformation agent.[/quote]
John,
In all due respect, I wonder if you ever dared to call him a disinfo agent while he was alive? I have literally hundreds of thousands of HEMMING's words--and they didn't cost me a dime. If you had been aware of his meager means you most likely wouldn't have said this. If I described his former living condition as "sub-modest" it would still be a drastic overstatement. HEMMING may have been a lot of things, but he wasn't a snitch and he wasn't for sale. For sure...
[/quote]
Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile - James H. Fetzer - 26-04-2010
You make a nice point, Monk. Why create an impostor "Judyth Vary Baker" if she were unimportant? Why continue to deny what she has to say if she is imagining things? The longer I have dealt with her, the more impressed I have become. I am convinced she IS "the real deal"!
[quote name='Greg Burnham' post='190641' date='Apr 24 2010, 01:45 AM']
I'm very curious about something. If Jim (or any prominent researcher) had started a thread that supported a claim that JFK had been murdered by....um space aliens, for instance...how much attention would it have received? I think, at first, some of his friends would have tried to "help him" out of concern for his well being perhaps, and that some of his detractors would have rejoiced in his folly and gleefully exploited the opportunity to "throw him under the bus" -- But, then what? More than likely, IMO, the thread would have died out fairly quickly.
But that's not what happened here. This thread is the longest in EF history. If it's all so nonsensical, why? I find it interesting that some of Judyth's detractors claim, on the one hand, that her story is so outlandish as to be easily dismissed as nonsense. Yet, on the other hand, they spend a tremendous amount of energy refuting claims that they characterize as having no merit. Why would it take such effort to demonstrate that something "obviously" ridiculous is ridiculous if it was, in fact, so obvious?
Perhaps there is no merit to these claims. That's not my point. But, if there is no merit to the claims and if they are as completely outlandish as her detractors claim, then why all the effort to refute them?
If ridiculous, it seems like it shouldn't have been that hard.[/quote]
Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile - James H. Fetzer - 26-04-2010
JUDYTH RESPONDS TO DIXIE DEA ABOUT "HARVEY" AND "LEE"
DIXIE DEA REMARKS:
However, when you say that Lillian Murret was Harveys aunt (rather then Lees aunt) ...that cant be true. Lillian was Margueretes sister Their maiden names were both Claverie. This is the Marguerete that was married to Robert E. Lee Oswald, John Pic and Edwin Ekdahl. and her son was Lee. So Lillian, is the one in regard to the dentist story and it was about Lee (not Harvey). I have no idea if Lillian knew about Harvey or not though.
The Marguerete that we are all most familiar with, was Harveys mother or someone acting in that capacity).
Harvey is the one from NY who may have came from Hungary and according to Armstrong's book. No relation to Lillian Murret or that Marguerete. So...I am confused as to what you have been saying about this.
JUDYTH REPLIES:
Everyone will remain confused if they believe this convoluted argument that "Harvey is the one from New York...No relation to Lillian Murret or that Marguerite."
==WE ARE TOLD THAT HARVEY WENT TO THE USSR -- CORRECT? THAT HE WAS FLUENT FROM CHLDHOOD IN RUSSIAN.
YET LILLIAN MURRET SAYS ON P. 146 OF HER TESTIMONY TO THE WARREN COMMISSION THAT, WHEN HER HUSBAND REBUKED "HARVEY" FOR NOT TEACHING MARINA ENGLISH, HE REPLIED, "I AM NOT GOING TO TEACH HER, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO LOSE MY RUSSIAN."
LEE PRACTICED HIS RUSSIAN IN MY PRESENCE AND SAID HE HAD TO WORK AT IT TO KEEP IT FLUENT. THIS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN NECESSARY IF HE WERE "BORN AND RAISED FLUENT", AS ARMSTRONG INSISTS.
TWO WITNESSES -- LILLIAN MURRET AND I -- STATE THE SAME THING. GEORGE DEMOHRENSCHILDT ALSO MENTIONED THAT LEE WANTED TO KEEP PRACTICING RUSSIAN ON MARINA TO KEEP HIS RUSSIAN FLUENT.==
THERE'S MORE. LET'S FOLLOW THE LOGIC. HERE'S THE QUOTE:
"This is the Marguerete that was married to Robert E. Lee Oswald, John Pic and Edwin Ekdahl. and her son was Lee."
==NOTE THAT "LEE" PHYSICALLY RESEMBLES HIS BROTHERS, ROBERT AND JOHN PIC, WHEN THEY WERE YOUNG CHILDREN. YET THE SAME EYEBROW SHAPE, THE SAME EAR PATERN AND SHAPE, BELONGS TO "LEE" AS WELL AS TO "HARVEY", AS ANY FORENSIC STUDY EASILY PROVES. THE DISTINCTIVE LEFT EYEBROW IS THE SAME IN ALL 'LEE' CHILDHOOD PHOTOS AND MATCH "HARVEY" EYEBROWS.
THE REPLY THAT LILLIAN KNEW 'HARVEY' HAD BEEN SUBSITUTED FOR 'LEE' BY JACK WHITE DOES NOT MATCH WITH WHAT IS STATED BY "B."
THROUGHOUT HER TESTIMONY, LILLIAN MURRET STATES THAT SHE SEES THE SAME INDIVIDUAL THROUGHOUT -- THE "LEE" SHE KNEW AS AS A CHILD WAS LOVED BY HIS COUSINS (PG. 128): "THEY LOVED LEE..THEY ALWAYS LOVED LEE."
HIS COUSIN MARILYN, HOWEVER, DRIVES "HARVEY" AND MARINA TO LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN TO CATCH CRABS. WHITE AND OTHERS INSIST I KNEW "HARVEY" IN NEW ORLEANS. WELL, THE ENTIRE MURRET FAMILY MIUST THEN HAVE KEPT THEIR MOUTHS SHUT TIGHT ABOUT "HARVEY", BECAUSE THEY KNEW "LEE" UNTIL "HARVEY" SHOWED UP WITH MARINA.
WE HAVE "HARVEY" BEING BAWLED OUT BY HIS UNCLE AFTER HE IS BAILED OUT OF JAIL. ALL OF THESE INTERACTIONS WITH "HARVEY".
NOT A WHISPER ABOUT EVER SEEING "LEE'" EVEN ONCE.
THE CHILD THEY "LOVED" THEY NEVER NOTICE IS NOW BEING IMPERSONATED, AND THEY GO ALONG WITH IT -- LILLIAN, DUTZ, JOYCE, MARILYN, JOHN, AND GENE MURRET. GENE IS GOING TO BECOME A PRIEST AND IS IN SEMINARY AT SPRING HILL, WHERE "HARVEY" SPEAKS. GENE INVITED "HARVEY" THERE.
NOBODY HAS WHISPERED A WORD ABOUT THE SUBSTITUTION -- INCLUDING MARINA WHO IS SLEEPING WITH BOTH MEN, ACCORDING TO WHITE, IF NOT ARMSTRONG, AND A PECULIAR SATEMENT ABOUT MARGUERITE BY HER OWN SISTER, LILLIAN, WHO DEPLORES THE FACT THAT MARGUERITE HAS LOST HER LOOKS.
I HAVE EXPLAINED THAT MARGUERITE SHOWED EVERY SYMPTOM, INCLUDING HER EMPOTIONAL ONES, OF HYPOTHYROIDISM, WHICH AGES YOU RAPIDLY, CHANGES YOUR LOOKS DRASTICALLY, AND MAKES YOU GAIN WEIGHT. (I GOT IT, SO DID MARGUERITE.)
LILLIAN DOES MENTION A "HARVEY". HOWEVER, ON P. 110: SHE SAYS HE WAS A RELATIVE WHO VISITED THEM ONCE WHEN LEE WAS A BABY. THAT HE AND MARGUERIE HAD A FALLING OUT. THAT SHE NEVER SAW HIM AGAIN BUT THAT HE HAD LATER DIED.
WE NEVER, EVER HEAR LILLIAN CALLING "HARVEY" HARVEY. HE IS ALWAYS "LEE".
THAT MAKES SENSE IF HE IS THE SAME PERSON THAT HE HAS ALWAYS BEEN.
THAT MAKES SENSE IF THERE WAS NEVER A "HARVEY."
I WILL SOON HAVE THER BOOK, BUT FROM THE STANDING ON ONE'S HEAD THAT HAS TO BE DONE -- THE ENTIRE FAMILY HAS TO BE PRIVY TO THE SUBSTITUTION AND NEVER, EVER TELL -- WHEN THE SIMPLE TRUTH IS SIMPLE --SOME RECORDS WERE FALSIFIED NOT TO HIDE "HARVEY" AND "LEE" BUT TO HIDE WHAT LEE H. OSWALD DID, HAD BEEN DOING, AND WOULD BE DOING AS A MINOR BUT REAL DOUBLE AGENT UNDER DEEP COVER.
AS FOR BIRTH CERTIFICATE PROBLEMS, I, TOO HAD THEM.
MY REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE WAS ALTERED.
I HAD TO HAVE A NEW ONE ISSUED WITH MY NAME RESTORED IN 1986. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT I AM A 'DIFFERENT JUDYTH VARY BAKER.==
JVB
[quote name='Dixie Dea' post='190613' date='Apr 23 2010, 10:14 PM']
Jim....Numerous times, you have mentioned something that I have been unclear about and unsure where you obtained the info. ...whether your own thoughts, from Judyth or from Armstrong's book. You do seem to be indicating that you have a problem accepting it and if you did read it in Armstrongs book and believe it to be an error, then I do have to agree with you, in this instance. It has been sometime since I read Armstrongs book, so I do not recall if this was an error in his book. But, since you have been freshly reading it, I am thinking this is where you obtained the info...although I cant imagine him making such an error....since it just doesn't fit. Although, I haven t read very many books that didnt have at least one error. I also feel that a book such as this, it could be quite easy to get mixed up and make an error.
However, when you say that Lillian Murret was Harveys aunt (rather then Lees aunt) ...that cant be true. Lillian was Margueretes sister Their maiden names were both Claverie. This is the Marguerete that was m'arried to Robert E. Lee Oswald, John Pic and Edwin Ekdahl. and her son was Lee. So Lillian, is the one in regard to the dentist story and it was about Lee (not Harvey). I have no idea if Lillian knew about Harvey or not though. The Marguerete that we are all most familiar with, was Harveys mother or someone acting in that capacity). Harvey is the one from NY who may have came from Hungary and according to Armstrong's book. No relation to Lillian Murret or that Marguerete. So...I am confused as to what you have been saying about this.
I have mentioned this several times in the past and you will probably call me idiotic, and most don't buy it either....but for a very long time, I have had the thoughts that LHO might be a twin. Why would his birth certificate still be hidden? I have other reasons, but am unable to get to my notes just now. However, Armstrong said in his book that there was no indication that he was a twin...it is still in my own thoughts though.
Dixie.[/quote]
Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile - James H. Fetzer - 26-04-2010
Does everyone feel they are entitled to post without doing any basic research on the subject of
this thread? Now Bill Kelly endorses Jack's blunder by reiterating a question about the particle
accelerator being housed at David Farrie's apartment! This is akin to Jack's naive report about
Mary having been killed in her apartment! If either of you would expend the least effort on DR.
MARY'S MONKEY, you would know (i) that the particle accelerator was at the US Public Service
Hospital, (ii) that Mary's body was found in her apartment, a setting that could not have caused
the damage she sustained, (iii) that she appears to have been killed at the hospital and had her
body moved to the apartment, and (iv) that the other "Judyth Vary Baker" was an impostor. It
is ridiculous to suggest that an agency went to the trouble to impersonate her if she were not a
genuine witness. I will ask Judyth about the Heidel ID, but it was probably to make it easier for
him to gain access. None of you is thinking this through. Jack is not even reading and now Bill is
playing the sap. Not only are we coping with those who are sincere but ignorant but also those,
like Josiah Thompson, who knows nothing about the case, endorses rubbish about it (because of
his massive ignorance), and then tries to parlay his ignorance into hits on me and Judyth! Well,
I thought I had seen ever shabby tactic in the book from him, but now he tops himself! Those
who have wondered about him need wonder no more. This thread is exposing him as a fraud.
[quote name='William Kelly' post='190801' date='Apr 25 2010, 09:36 PM']
QUOTE (Jack White @ Apr 22 2010, 05:16 PM)
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...&pid=190450
But Jim...Mary Sherman died at home in her apartment. If the LINEAR ACCELERATOR was located in the Public Health Hospital, how could it have been responsible for her death?
Have you read the reports of her death?
In post #1479, I identified the location of the linear particle accelerator:
None of it can be known with certainty, but the basic elements are very strongly supported. It would be a mistake to suppose that every aspect of her story has to be supported to the same degree as every other. Among the 17 findings that Haslam enumerates, which I have reiterated above, the most important and best supported concern Judyth's ability to conduct reseach on cancer, that she was induced to come to New Orleans by Alton Ochsner, that she met and worked with Mary Sherman, David Ferrie, and Lee Oswald, that Mary was killed by a massive source of electricity (almost certainly the linear particle accelerator at the Public Health Hospital), and that Judyth was summarily dismissed by Ochsner after she complained about the prisoner who was used in a (fatal) experiment conducted without informed consent.
In post #1495, he asks if the accelerator was located in Ferrie's apartment or lab across the
street. Not to put too fine a point on it but, given this post, how can post #1474 be truthful?
QUOTE (Jack White @ Apr 22 2010, 04:32 PM)
[url="http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?act=findpost&pid=190422"]
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...&pid=190422[/url]
Here is a LINEAR PARTICLE ACCELERATOR. Did David Ferrie have his in his apartment
or his laboratory across the street?
Jack
I still have two unanswered questions on the table.
Who was the OTHER Judyth Vary Baker who Ed Haslam met?
And why did Oswald forge a fake vaccine card with Dr. Alek Hidel's name on it from the
US Public Service Hospital in New Orleans?
Oswald reportedly checked out this hospital as a potential place for his second daughter to be born, but that plan was thwarted when Marina wrote to Ruth Paine via Art Young and said she would go with her to Texas for the baby to be born.
This is the hospital where the partical accellerator was said to be located, the one that killed Mary Sherman, though according to EH she was moved to her apartment to make it appear she was the victim of an intruder.
Of course there is the world's largest and new particle accellerator in Switzerland that also recently made the news:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15727
A would-be saboteur arrested today at the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland made the bizarre claim that he was from the future. Eloi Cole, a strangely dressed young man, said that he had travelled back in time to prevent the LHC from destroying the world.
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gadgets/0,39029552,49305387,00.htm
The LHC successfully collided particles at record force earlier this week, a milestone Mr Cole was attempting to disrupt by stopping supplies of Mountain Dew to the experiment's vending machines. He also claimed responsibility for the infamous baguette sabotage in November last year.
Mr Cole was seized by Swiss police after CERN security guards spotted him rooting around in bins. He explained that he was looking for fuel for his 'time machine power unit', a device that resembled a kitchen blender.
Police said Mr Cole, who was wearing a bow tie and rather too much tweed for his age, would not reveal his country of origin. "Countries do not exist where I am from. The discovery of the Higgs boson led to limitless power, the elimination of poverty and Kit-Kats for everyone. It is a communist chocolate hellhole and I'm here to stop it ever happening."
This isn't the first time time-travel has been blamed for mishaps at the LHC. Last year, the Japanese physicist Masao Ninomiya and Danish string-theory pioneer Holger Bech Nielsen put forward the hypothesis that the Higgs boson was so "abhorrent" that it somehow caused a ripple in time that prevented its own discovery.
Professor Brian Cox, a former CERN physicist and full-time rock'n'roll TV scientist, was sympathetic to Mr Cole. "Bless him, he sounds harmless enough. At least he didn't mention bloody black holes."
Mr Cole was taken to a secure mental health facility in Geneva but later disappeared from his cell. Police are baffled, but not that bothered.[/quote]
Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile - James H. Fetzer - 26-04-2010
JUDYTH RESPONDS TO JACK ABOUT ALL OF THIS "MONKEY BUSINESS"
JACK WHITE WROTE:
I continue to be puzzled by this. Here is an exact quote of Haslam's question and JVB's reply:
“My question is about your time in New Orleans in the summer of 1963… Do I understand that you are saying that you were told that the extracts that you prepared at David Ferrie's apartment and delivered to Mary Sherman's apartment were being subjected to radiation and then recycled into more mice? Do I have this right?”
JUDYTH'S REPLY:
==EXACTLY...ALSO, INTO MONKEYS. MANY WERE KILLED, BUT THEY ORDERED THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF NEW MONKEYS…==
So in JVB's own words, she claims that IN FERRIE'S APARTMENT WERE MICE THAT WERE BEING RADIATED
and ALSO "THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF NEW MONKEYS" AFTER MANY WERE KILLED.
When I asked a question about the "thousands of new monkeys",
==Thousands of POUNDS of new monkeys--and if he had ever asked, we went from MARMOSETS to GREEN MONKEYS. JACK PLEASE READ THE TEXT MORE CAREFULLY, YOU ARE MISQUOTING. ==
their care and feeding, etc., Judith became defensive
==NOT DEFENSIVE. MR. WHITE SAID "THOUSANDS OF MONKEYS" WHEN I SAID "THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF NEW MONKEYS WERE SHIPPED IN TO REPLACE WHAT WERE KILLED". THE FIRST STEP WAS MARMOSETS. WE GOT THEM TO DISSECT. THE NEXT STEP WERE THE GREEN MONKEYS. WE ONLY GOT THE TUMORS TO WORK WITH, PROCESSED THEM, SET UP TISSUE CULTURES, PREPARED THEM FOR RADIATION. THEY WERE BROUGHT TO MARY SHERMAN WHO INSPECTED THEM AND TOOK THE BEST CANDIDATES TO THE USPHSH FOR RADIATION.==
and said (via Jim) that the thousands of monkeys
==YOU ARE MISREADING. WE USED SEVERAL HUNDRED, NOT THOUSANDS, OF MARMOSET INFANTS...==
were not full sized rhesus monkeys, but "thumb-
==WE THEN MOVED ON AND TRANSFERRED THE CANCERS TO AFRICAN GREEN MONKEYS==
sized" marmoset monkeys, small as mice. When I researched marmoset monkeys and found that in 1963 marmosets were not yet being used in medical research,
==MR. WHITE DID NOT DO A GOOD RESEARCH JOB, ALL HE HAD TO DO WAS ASK AND I WOULD HAVE SUPPLIED HIM REFERENCES.==
everyone has become silent. I look forward to the answer to the questions about this monkey business.
==READING CAREFULLY IS EXPECTED OF A RESEARCHER. DOING ADEQUATE RESEARCH IN A SUBJECT OR ASKING INFORMED QUESTIONS INSTEAD OF ALWAYS TRYING TO DIG MY GRAVE WOULD BE APPRECIATED.==
JVB
[quote name='James H. Fetzer' post='190802' date='Apr 25 2010, 08:38 PM']
Jack,
You appear to be confounding the mormosets that were kept in cages with the mice
(because they were very small) and the monkeys that were stored at the primate
center. Have you read DR. MARY'S MONKEY? When you do, I think you will begin
to realize how many of your posts were misdirected just because of your ignorance.
Jim
[quote name='Jack White' post='190708' date='Apr 25 2010, 04:59 AM']
[quote name='Jack White' post='190668' date='Apr 24 2010, 04:54 AM']
Remarkably, there is a timeline of newspaper mentions of MARMOSETS for
medical research available on the internet.
In the 1930s, there are two mentions that it might be possible. In the 1940s there was
one mention that it might be possible.
In the 1950s, there were no mentions.
In the 1960s, there were some mentions that the government was considering replacing
rhesus monkeys with marmosets. I could find NO mention that by 1963 marmosets were
widely used in medical research.
It appears that JVB's claim of using marmosets may be premature.
Jack
[attachment=19938:marmoset...timeline.jpg][/quote]
I continue to be puzzled by this. Here is an exact quote of Haslam's question and JVB's reply:
[color="#000080"]
“My question is about your time in New Orleans in the summer of 1963… Do I understand that you are saying that you were told that the extracts that you prepared at David Ferrie's apartment and delivered to Mary Sherman's apartment were being subjected to radiation and then recycled into more mice? Do I have this right?”
Judyth’s response:
==EXACTLY...ALSO, INTO MONKEYS. MANY WERE KILLED, BUT THEY ORDERED THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF NEW MONKEYS…== [/color]
So in JVB's own words, she claims that IN FERRIE'S APARTMENT WERE MICE THAT WERE BEING RADIATED
and ALSO "THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF NEW MONKEYS" AFTER MANY WERE KILLED.
When I asked a question about the "thousands of new monkeys", their care and feeding, etc., Judith became
defensive and said (via Jim) that the thousands of monkeys were not full sized rhesus monkeys, but "thumb-
sized" marmoset monkeys, small as mice. When I researched marmoset monkeys and found that in 1963
marmosets were not yet being used in medical research, everyone has become silent. I look forward to
the answer to the questions about this monkey business.
Jack
[/quote]
[/quote]
Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile - James H. Fetzer - 26-04-2010
Intriguing. This is one of your more constructive posts. I will ask Judyth about it when I have the chance. She is traveling. And if something like this were to substantiate her claims, then you, Barb, will admit she IS "the real deal"?
[quote name='Barb Junkkarinen' post='190812' date='Apr 25 2010, 09:41 PM']
Jim,
Glad to see you posting today! I have a question for both you and Judyth.
Since you have gotten to know Judyth so well with all your extensive contact and reading to get up to speed on her claims and story, you must know about the book The Pocket Aristotle that has some underlining and marginal notes in it ... that Judyth claims Oswald wrote. Judyth has told you about that, yes? Judyth?
For years, the old team Judyth was asked why this writing has never been put before a court qualified qualified professional documents examiner who could verify or deny that the writing is, in fact, Oswald'. Other than the cost of an examiner, which they had never checked into, no real reason was ever given as to why this critical piece of evidence Judyth has was never examined. One would think this item would have been given top priority!
With you on board now, can we depend on you to work with Judyth to get the appropriate examination done and the findings posted? If this writing in her book is verified to be that of Oswald, it will go a long way in supporting some of her claims!
Two pages are posted on Marsh's website. Only one of the links seems to be working - the other keeps giving an error message. Here is the one that works:
![[Image: JudythBook2OsWriting.jpg]](http://the-puzzle-palace.com/JudythBook2OsWriting.jpg)
Judyth, will you send Jim copies of both pages for him to post. And will you work with him to get this long overdue professional exam done of your book?
Thanks,
Barb :-)[/quote]
Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile - James H. Fetzer - 26-04-2010
PARTING REFLECTIONS FROM JIM AND JUDYTH VARY BAKER ABOUT THIS THREAD
NOTE: Since Tracy posted "THE END", which was my favorite of the entire thread, there has been a noticeable
increase in rubbish posts from the likes of Glenn Viklund, Kevin Greenlee, and Josiah Thompson, all of whom, it
would appear, want to get in their "last licks". Greenlee appears to be a Josiah stooge, posting smears that are
vintage "Tink" rubbish. He appears to have no more idea of my research on JFK than Viklund. Jack continues
to post sincere but ignorant posts, where Bill Kelly, of all people, wades right in to endorse them, where if they
had read DR. MARY'S MONKEY, which I have recommended time and again, they would not make themselves
look quite so silly. A nice illustration, no doubt, is inferring from my observation that I did not know Judyth's
story to the conclusion that I knew nothing about her. Everyone knows about Judyth. My point was that I did
not know her story well enough to be making up her posts! I was responding to the suggestion that I had been
writing them for her. Yet there have been some valuable contributions, including this post by Dean Hartwell, who
needs make no apology for how much of HARVEY & LEE I have read. If I can find blunders about the "index" of
the supplementary volumes and the date of the founding of the Warren Commission in the "Introduction", which
is then compounded by the apparent absurdity of Lillian Murret ("Harvey"'s aunt) paying for "Lee"'s dental bill,
what do you think will happen when Judyth has the copy I have sent to her? This should be most interesting. I
am grateful to Dean and to Monk and to Pamela and several others who have made constructive contributions
to this thread. I especially appreciate Dean and Monk's attempts to explain what has been going on and why I
have found it frustrating to deal with so many critics who haven't read DR. MARY'S MONKEY, don't read posts,
and reveal their ignorance with every post, a group, I am sorry to say, that includes my dear friend Jack White.
I cannot imagine anyone more appropriate to bring this to a conclusion, even though it represents something
more akin to an "intermission", since her book, ME & LEE, is about to appear. Then we can do this over again!
JUDYTH COMMENTS ON THE THREAD
IF PEOPLE ARE DISRESPECTFUL AND THUS CARELESS WITH THIS COMPLEX HISTORY, SUCH AS JACK WHITE SAYING WE USED THOUSANDS OF MONKEYS, SAYING THAT WE USED RADIATION IN FERRIE'S APARTMENT, AFTER IT WAS EXPLAINED CONCERNING THE LOCATION OF THE LINEAR ACCELERATOR; OR LIFTON SAYING I SAID 'CANCUN' OR THAT I SAID I KNEW LEE OSWALD'S HANDLER'S REAL NAME FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, OR RIGHT FROM THE VERY START; OR JOHN MCADAMS SAYING MARY SHERMAN WAS NOT A CANCER RESEARCHER--IF READERS AND RESEARCHERS ARE THIS CARELESS WITH MY TESTIMONY, THEN THEY OF COURSE CAN CAN COME UP WITH ENDLESS OBJECTIONS.
AFTER A DECADE, THE PETTINESS OF THE ARGUMENTS THROWN AGAINS ME ARE ALL FOCUSED ON ONE THING: CHARACTER ASSASSINATION. FIND SOMETHING--ANYTHING--TO DISCREDIT HER. FORGET THE FACT THAT SHE IS HUMAN AND THAT SHE ALSO GETS MISQUOTED--AS HAS BEEN SHOWN ON THIS THREAD--FROM THE GET-GO (THE ACCUSATION THAT I HATED MY FAMILY NAME OF 'AVARY' AND CHANGED IT TO 'VARY', IS A NICE ILLUSTRATION: NO CITATION, OF COURSE, TOTAL FICTION--WHERE DID IT COME FROM? JACK WHITE DIDN'T TELL US, BUT SWARMS OF RUBBISH LIKE THAT IS FLYING BETWEEN COMPUTERS. SO MUCH JUNK ABOUT ME IS GOING ON BEHIND THE SCENES, YET I AM THE ONE WHO IS DECLARED RESPONSIBLE FOR DIVIDING THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY? WHY?
FORTUNATELY, A FEW RESPONSIBLE, CAREFUL RESEARCHERS WITH INTEGRITY DECIDED TO FIND OUT PERSONALLY AND NOT RELY ON HEARSAY. A GOOD EXAMPLE IS WHEN I PRODUCED INFORMATION ABOUT LEE OSWALD'S READING LIST. DR. FETZER NOTED HAT IT WAS A GOOD 'WISH LIST' AND THAT IT RAISED THE POSSIBILITY THAT PERHAPS I WAS EMBELLISHING...UNLIKE DOUG WELDON, HE INQUIRED. HE DID NOT JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS. HE ASKED ME.
HE GOT HIS ANSWER: I PROVIDED THE FBI LIST SHOWING THE BOOKS I HAD CITED WERE ON THAT LIST. I HAD EMBELLISHED NOTHING. HOWEVER, I HAD ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BECAUSE I ADDED COMPLETE TITLES AND SHOWED THAT THESE BOOKS WERE HEAVY READING, PROVIG OSWALD WAS NOT ONLY EDUCATED BUT THAT HE AND I WERE INTELLECTUALLY COMPATIBLE. [NOTE: THE BOOKS ON JUDYTH'S LIST WERE ACTUALLY INCLUDED ON AN FBI LIST THAT BECAME A WARREN COMMISSION DOCUMENT. SEE POST #1569.]
THOSE RESEARCHERS WHO HAVE ASKED QUESTIONS OF ME AND, WHEN THEY DID NOT UNDERSTAND, ASKED FOR ELUCIDATION, HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SATISFIED. THOSE REPUTABLE RESEARCHERS WHO HAVE SPENT A GREAT DEAL OF TIME RESEARCHING MY TESTIMONY, IN CONTACT WITH ME PERSONALLY, HAVE NOT BEEN DISAPPOINTED. IN CONTRAST, MANY OTHERS HAVE BEEN BRINGING FORTH OBJECTIONS BASED ON TRYING TO PROVE I AM A BAD PERSON. THE PATTERN HAS BEEN THE SAME PATERN FOR A DECADE, NOW.
NOBODY IS PERFECT. BUT WHEN MY SATEMENTS ARE TWISTED RIGHT BEFORE MY EYES -- SUCH AS 'THOUSANDS OF POUNDS OF MONKEYS' GETTING MORPHED WITHIN AN HOUR INTO 'THOUSANDS OF MONKEYS' -- ONE MUST REBUKE THOSE WHO ARE SO CARELESS AND THOUGHTLESS. MANY OF YOU HAVE BEEN UNKIND AND UNFAIR AND CARELESS WITH A WITNESS. LOVE IS STRONGER THAN HATE. MY LOVE FOR THE INNOCENT OSWALD WILL PROVIDE ME THE STRENGTH I NEED TO WITHSTAND AGAINST ALL THE WITCH-HUNTS CONDUCTED AGAINST ME.
THE PERSECUTION AND SUFFERING THAT I AND MY FAMILY ENDURED WHEN I TRIED SEVERAL TIMES TO LIVE AGAIN IN THE UNITED STATES, AFTER BEING DRIVEN OUT BY THREATS AND ACTUAL INCIDENTS THAT HOSPITALIZED ME, CAN BE JUXTAPOSED AGAINST WHAT I HAVE ENDURED IN THE PRINTED WORD HERE. THE ATTACKS LODGED HERE ARE A SMALL SAMPLE OF WHAT I HAVE HAD TO ENDURE. I AM GRATEFUL FOR THOSE WHO HAVE TRIED TO TREAT ME FAIRLY. I WOULD LIVE IN MY COUNTRY IF I COULD. BUT CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE MADE THAT IMPOSSIBLE.
SOMEONE RECENTLY SENT ME A CONTAINER OF SOIL FROM THE USA.
IT IS PROBABLY MY MOST TREASURED POSSESSION
JVB
[quote name='Dean Hartwell' post='190626' date='Apr 23 2010, 11:42 PM']
[quote name='Glenn Viklund' post='190620' date='Apr 23 2010, 10:55 PM']
In between his ramblings, rantings and insults to most everyone in this thread, Fetzer is repeating this question:
"If Judyth Vary Baker really were a flake, why in the world would there be so much time and effort devoted to discrediting her?"
Mr Fetzer, are you pretending to not understand that? Coming from a professor, this is a bizarre question, no matter how many times you repeat it.
But let me try to answer it for you.
The reason is that a fake has nothing to do with the JFK assassination. It is perfectly understandable that so many people are protesting this womans totally unwarranted, false and utterly unsubstanciated claims of having anything to do with the JFK assassination. In fact, based on previous actions, this womans credibility is very close to zero. Therefore, nothing she says, nothing she does, nothing she claims, can be accepted without solid evidence. Nothing whatsoever. That's the position she's put herself in, after being caught lying on hundreds of occasions during the past decade.
Without having asked anyone else, it is an entirely reasonable assumption that this is the only reason for any interest in what you are promoting here, of you, or of this woman herself.
You have been rambling on for weeks about evidence. Kevin Greenlee asks you to provide those on only one of your points, of your so called evidence.
You fail to provide anything viable. You fail miserably. Your are doing exactly what Ms Baker has been doing over the past decade. Lots of claims, with nothing to back them up. Instead you provide Kevin with your standard rants. Useless BS that insults Kevin and everyone else here.
Mr Fetzer, your performance is way below par, way below.[/quote]
Glenn,
Here is what I believe has happened on this thread:
Jim started this thread to discuss Judyth and her story as his topic.
He stated his hypothesis that Judyth's story is true.
He provided as evidence a number of sources, including Dr. Mary's Monkey, photographs and records regarding Judyth, interviews with Judyth, etc.
Others have responded, sometimes to these sources and sometimes with other information.
Jim has asked the critics to read these sources before making a judgment.
Some have done so, some have not.
It is reasonable for him to be frustrated with those who choose not to read the information that he bases his hypothesis on.
It is reasonable for him to be frustrated with those who go off the subject.
It should also be pointed out that he took the time to read PARTS OF (SEE ABOVE) Harvey and Lee to better understand some of the critics.
If you believe you have done the "homework" called for in order to judge Judyth's story, great!
If you don't think Jim has provided enough information for you after all these posts, or the right information, I may disagree, but I will simply leave it at that.
Dean
[/quote]
Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile - James H. Fetzer - 26-04-2010
CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS FROM MY PSY OPS EXPERT
The perfect Cover Story for closing Ochsner's Program down, instituting a complete cover-up, and taking the program super deep black
What a perfect cover story for shutting down Ochsner's program>>>AN ACCIDENT with the particle accelerator at the lab. A horrendous accident that requires the immediate mercy killing of the victim, so that if any real investigation is allowed it will lead to Ochsner and/or his key subordinates as either murderers or accessories to murder and accessories after the fact (this is best described as a "situationally mandated human compromise" involving an unwilling murderer(s) who must act out of compassion and have a long term motivation to keep silent about everything even peripherally associated).
And of course Inca could be linked to the JFK Assassination and to Ochsner and his associate Oswald too if necessary. So you can see that the super-slick intel faction did a pretty good job creating massive motivation for everyone to keep quiet about Ochsner's program and refrain from any investigation which could easily bring down the whole Ochsner clinic and the whole public health system.
Jim, these extraordinary historical mega-event turning points (like the JFK assassination) which redirect history are almost always a convergence of motives between the powerful super-elites and factions at the very top of the shadow govt. LBJ was perhaps the final catalyst and it is likely the the super-slick faction manipulated circumstances to bring immediate legal threats against him related to the Bobby Baker boxcar leases for boxcars that never existed. Now this is how these super-slick intel folk's work. They play all sides against the middle and manipulate conditions and settings to obtain the outcomes they want.
The bottom line is this Jim. The super-slicks realized that Dr. Sherman had either discovered the cure for the viral chains contaminating the vaccines or was very close, and knew that she was basically an honest honorable person who would talk to the WC investigators when they met with her. They knew she would tell the truth of what she knew to them only and they did not want it in any record. They also realized that the program needed to be taken completely deep black (above top secret).
They had come to understand that DNA and RNA warfare was their key to total spectrum dominance at home and in the battlefield in the future and the ultimate cure for overpopulation and a pesky public and congress that might did too deep into their affairs. They also understood that the vaccine contaminated with viral chains needed to be continued to make the cancer industry strong as well as big medicine and big pharma too. Big profits were at stake. And of course the potential for controlled eugenics and mind control was now well within reach.
One key lead which could be followed would be to find where the particle accelerator was moved too. It is unlikely equipment that expensive would be junked. It may have been moved to a super-secure base such as at Fort Detrick, MD Army Biological Weapons Laboratory, Dugway proving grounds, Dulce NM underground base or area 51 S9 papoose lake in Nevada or some other facility, or may have been sold to a close foreign ally like Israel (hint, hint).
Anyone who studies big pharma and its history in detail soon realizes that there is a big involvement of the wall street Nazi sympathizers who financed the Nazi movement starting in the 1920's and "traded with that enemy" throughout WW2.
Well Jim, by now you can see that by your focusing on Ed Haslam's excellent research and the important history provided by JVB, you have taken the JFK assassination to a whole new level and in a whole new direction. You have now thrown the current work of several major researchers into full tilt and shown that they were pursuing the wrong trail. And these folks are in shock and dismay because of it. And then you have the usual cadre of WC apologists and Lone Nutters that for years have kept pushing their company lines whether they knew they were dupes or not or even worked as an asset of the company, which some clearly have. Finally Jim you have driven a stake through the heart of their nefarious nonsensical arguments. And they are hopping mad and are attempting to discredit you and insult you at every opportunity. Their arguments are empty and their true colors are now openly displayed for all who love truth to see. These folks are doofuses and have collapsed under their own absurdities.
You have picked up where Garrison has left off. And you have taken the JFK Assassination investigation in a whole new, unexpected direction which has FULLY EXPOSED THE INTERSECTION OF THE MOB, INTEL, THE MILITARY, THE US PUBLIC HEATH SERVICE, BIG PHARMA, THE CANCER INSTITUTE AND BIG MEDICINE.
Highest commendations are due to you, Ed Haslam and Judyth Vary for making such groundbreaking excellent contributions.
Jim, this recent breakthrough in the JFK Assassination is the biggest discovery in the last twenty years and DIRECTLY TIES TO THE CURRENT HEALTH OF THE US POPULATION, CURRENT VACCINATIONS, EUGENICS, SUPER DEEP BLACK ADVANCED BIO-WARFARE, BIG PHARMA, AND BIG MEDICINE.
Could this discovery and new turn in the JFK Investigation be any bigger than this????
No wonder such long term and extensive psyops have been brought against JVB over so many years and no wonder so many WC apologists, Lone-Nutters and others have tried to discredit yours and Judyth Vary's postings on the Educational Forum even resorting to petty insults and glaring lies against you and Judyth Vary.
Jim, you turned the Educational Forum into a temporary and very large Rorshach Inkblot Test and hooked many enemies of the truth without their understanding that they took the bait. This gives you a big snapshot into how cover-ups are run long term. You hooked the doofuses and elicited them to give themselves away. And you also exposed some researchers who have likely been going off down the wrong rabbit hole.
Again congratulations for hitting another grand slam home run. I am most appreciative of your continuing and excellent work for the last 20 years I have followed it.
Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile - James H. Fetzer - 26-04-2010
Thank you for this extraordinarily interesting overview about this thread, Michael. You have performed a service by posting it. I have detected no weakening in Ed Haslam's support for Judyth, but he awaits the publication of her book to continue with the debate, when more documents and records will become available, which is a reasonable position.
[quote name='Michael Hogan' date='Apr 26 2010, 03:06 AM' post='190841']
[quote name='Greg Burnham' post='190641' date='Apr 23 2010, 07:45 PM']
I'm very curious about something. If Jim (or any prominent researcher) had started a thread that supported a claim that JFK had been murdered by....um space aliens, for instance...how much attention would it have received? I think, at first, some of his friends would have tried to "help him" out of concern for his well being perhaps, and that some of his detractors would have rejoiced in his folly and gleefully exploited the opportunity to "throw him under the bus" -- But, then what? More than likely, IMO, the thread would have died out fairly quickly.
But that's not what happened here. This thread is the longest in EF history. If it's all so nonsensical, why? I find it interesting that some of Judyth's detractors claim, on the one hand, that her story is so outlandish as to be easily dismissed as nonsense. Yet, on the other hand, they spend a tremendous amount of energy refuting claims that they characterize as having no merit. Why would it take such effort to demonstrate that something "obviously" ridiculous is ridiculous if it was, in fact, so obvious?
Perhaps there is no merit to these claims. That's not my point. But, if there is no merit to the claims and if they are as completely outlandish as her detractors claim, then why all the effort to refute them? If ridiculous, it seems like it shouldn't have been that hard.[/quote]
Greg, I really think that Jim Fetzer, as much as the topic itself, is the reason for this thread's staying power.
His stamina has been remarkable. The sheer volume and content of his postings have been amazing to me.
He has adopted sort of a scorched earth policy in dealing with people that refuse to see things his way. He
has advanced many arguments, some better than others in my opinion. I respect his resolve in defending what
he sincerely, passionately and steadfastly believes to be the truth. I do believe that his lapses into
bellicosity have harmed his arguments and his persona. I also believe that he allowed Jack White
to frame the debate to an extent by allowing John Armstrong's book to assume such a prominent position
in the JVB/LHO debate. If Jim abandons posting on this thread, I would expect things to drastically
taper down and run out of momentum. I believe that Jim Fetzer has been the gasoline that fueled this engine.
All the other ingredients for a record-breaking thread came together in a perfect storm. There was a contentious,
take one side or the other issue (not dissimilar to body alteration, Zapruder alteration, or two Oswalds*),
involvement of a number of prominent researchers, an irresolvable clash of intellects and egos (certainly not just
Mr Fetzer and Mr White), a diversion into other theories, a predictable devolvement into arguments about motivations,
competence, experience, application of logic, and on and on. All these factors motivated many members to be very
vigorous in their posting.
*(I do not mean to equate these three things with JVB's story in any other respect)
What began as a fundamental disagreement between Jim Fetzer and Jack White quickly escalated into
a situation that resulted in a long-standing friendship becoming severely damaged. By the time David Lifton
entered the fray, it was clear that most members that were posting had made up their minds about Judyth Baker
long ago. This frustrated Jim Fetzer and he began responding to every criticism, no matter by whom. A lot of
researchers and members weighed in. The drama of researchers that can't get along with each other has always
made for long threads. Jim Fetzer's rift (for lack of a better word) with Doug Weldon was startling.
Then Judyth Baker, through Jim, became active in her own defense. This was a catalytic development;
it served to give the thread even more life and momentum.
This thread serves as a fascinating glimpse into the different prisms we all employ when it comes to
viewing events surrounding President Kennedy's murder. I have learned a lot about how certain researchers
and members view things fundamentally and how they react to opposing views.
I think that in respect to the main thrust of this thread, it is important to separate Baker's claims
of having a loving relationship with Lee Oswald from the rest of her story. It is this particular aspect
of her narrative that is so radioactive, so to speak.
When Jim Fetzer initiated this thread it was clear that he was accepting of JVB's story as it pertains to Oswald.
He appeared to be unaware that Ed Haslam's book Dr. Mary's Monkey supported his position. Later in the thread,
he seemed to get up to speed and Haslam's book quickly became one of the major cornerstones of his argument.
Jim has posted the two pertinent chapters that deal with JVB's story.
Maybe partially in response to Jack White's exhortations to read Harvey & Lee, Jim Fetzer wants to make sure that
everyone reads Haslam's book. But as I see it, Haslam really offers little in the way of evidence beyond what is
commonly known and nothing in the way of proof that JVB and LHO were lovers. Ed Haslam urged the readers of
Dr Mary's Monkey to make up their own minds by reading Baker's two-volume book Lee Harvey Oswald. Haslam has
seemingly backed away from that position and is now urging people to wait for Judyth Baker's new book. He has posted
three times (I think) on this thread and has taken the position that discussing the JVB/LHO story will not really be productive
until her new book comes out and people read it. Jim Fetzer didn't really take that advice and instead still chooses to actively
direct readers to Dr Mary's Monkey. That strategy has not been very effective. I must note that earlier in this thread, Jim Fetzer issued me a strong and classy apology for some of the things he said to me. Although I still disagree with him about Dr Mary's Monkey as it pertains to JVB/LHO, he has since said some very nice things about me. I appreciate both.
One of the positive things that has come out of this thread is your joining EF and participating, Greg. I think many
members have appreciated the balanced and informed positions you have taken whether they agree with you or not.
Maybe marriage has mellowed you a little, but I'm glad you still care.
[/quote]
Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile - James H. Fetzer - 26-04-2010
Right! And while I am at it, I had might as well have a DNA comparison between remnants on the pages of the book and the body that was exhumed, verify that Judyth Vary was actually born "Judyth Vary", and resolve a host of other issues. Just when I think you might be a decent person, you demonstrate, as you have throughout this thread, that you are really just a hack. I am sorry, Barb Junkkarinen, but I have found no redeeming qualities in you as a human being.
[quote name='Barb Junkkarinen' post='190842' date='Apr 26 2010, 03:14 AM']
[quote name='James H. Fetzer' post='190815' date='Apr 25 2010, 09:57 PM']
Intriguing. This is one of your more constructive posts. I will ask Judyth about it when I have the chance. She is traveling. And if something like this were to substantiate her claims, then you, Barb, will admit she IS "the real deal"?[/quote]
If you can obtain and post a notarized certificate/report of authemticity from a professional, court qualified documents examiner attesting that the handwriting in Judyth's Pocket Aristotle book was written by Lee Harvey Oswald, it will go a long way toward substantiating her claim that she knew Lee Harvey Oswald in New Orleans in 1963. And that would be a tremendous step for her, the importance is not lost on you! Would it prove that she is the "real deal" with all of her claims overall? Of course not.
Does it give you any pause that Judyth has not pushed to have this book examined by such a qualified professional over the last 10 years? Or that she hadn't even mentioned this potentially explosive piece proof to you?
[/quote]