Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[James H. Fetzer]

When an Adrian Mack has such an obvious agenda to subvert an historic thread on a forum that was founded, in large measure, to exclude hacks, shills, and trolls, it baffles me that he should be given such a wide latitude to practice his skills. When I organized a research group to study the assassination of JFK in 1992, I did so by inviting those who know more than I about various aspects of the case, including a world authority on the human brain, who was an expert on wound ballistics; a Ph.D. in physics who was also an M.D. and board certified in radiation oncology; a physician who had attended the moribund president in Trauma Room #1 and then, two days later, was responsible for the treatment of his alleged assassin; a legendary photo-analyst, who had testified before the HSCA during its reinvestigation about fakery in the Oswald "backyard photographs"; and an Australian Ph.D. in physics, this time with the area of specialization of electromagnetism and the properties of light and the laws of optics. I have continued that practice here by inviting an expert on psy ops to offer his observations about what has been going on here, up to this point, primarily on the Simkin forum, but here and now on this thread and in this forum.

We have reinvestigated the case from the ground up, including reviewing the authenticity of the medical record, including the autopsy report, the X-rays, the brain shown in diagrams and photographs at the National Archives; the physical evidence, including the alleged assassin's weapon, the paper bag, and the presumptive "assassin's lair"; the forensic evidence, including the shell casings allegedly found at the scene, the paper bag in which the carbine was supposed to have been brought into the building, and the testimony of co-workers, who observed him in and around the lunchroom on the second floor at 11:50 AM, Noon, 12:15 PM, and as late as 12:25 PM by the executive secretary to the Vice President of the Book Depository. The entire case against Lee Harvey Oswald is an enormous house of cards, where, no matter where you begin, sustained and serious inquiry leads to the same conclusion, namely: that Lee Harvey Oswald was exactly what he said he was when he described himself as "a patsy". The weapon cannot have fired the bullets that killed the president; he was not on the 6th floor at the time; and he admired JFK and had no reason to want to assassinate him. So the alleged assassin lacked motive, means, and opportunity to kill JFK.

There are many indications that Lee was recruited by ONI as a Marine recruit and that his pseudo-defection to the Soviet Union was a mission for which he had been delegated by the intelligence services of the United States. Of all the potential sources of information about him, especially regarding his activities after his return to America and relocation in New Orleans, none has greater promise to shed light upon some of the murkiest aspects of the plot to kill the president than the personal reports of a woman who had an extensive relationship with him, both as a co-worker in a cover asset, the Riley Coffee Company, and as a collaborator in covert operations, where she maintained many of his work records and conducted research on cancer and bioweapons in association with some nefarious characters on the scene at the time, including Alton Ochsner, David Ferrie, Clay Shaw, Jack Ruby, and even Carlos Marcello. Her first-hand interactions with his man and others who were involved with him promises to expose some of the seediest features of intelligence agency operations, not only in gun-running and sabotage operations against Castro but also in manipulating agents for the sake of unspecified objectives, where compartmentalization of information and classification of operations was the name of the game that she reveals.

It would be inconceivable to me that a source of this magnitude would not be subjected to multiple forms of harassment and that, on a forum of this kind, attempts to subvert her story would not be made. It is not Judyth who has offered the moon landing hoax or the events of 9/11 as other examples of "the big lie". And merely mentioning the hypothesis that big medicine, big pharma, and the cancer society might share an interest in silencing her because she offers the promise of curing cancer does not discredit her. On the contrary, it offers a perspective from which it becomes entirely plausible why she may pose a threat on multiple levels, not only in humanizing the alleged assassin and thereby undoing decades of demonization but also in exposing the long-standing interest in our intelligence agencies in the development of subtle means for killing people, especially targeted enemies, but also those who know too much and whose information, were it to become a matter of public knowledge, would threaten the covert operations and potentially even the existence of the agencies that pursued those themselves. In order to gain insights about what has been going on here--both with respect to what this crucial witness knows and the multiple forms of attack to which she has been subjected--therefore, I invited commentary from someone more expert than I.

Anyone who reads what my psy ops expert has to say will realize that what is really at stake appears to be far greater than merely the romance between an intelligence asset of the United States and his paramour. That is not something I would have recognized on my own. Moreover, that the underlying motivation for attempting to marginalize her could run so much deeper than I had supposed came as a revelation. In spite of what you are being told by Adrian Mack, no one should have any difficulty sorting out who is speaking in any of these posts. I have clearly demarcated those that have come from my expert source, while Adrian has insinuated more than once that his comments are obfuscating the record. We are engaged here in multiple activities, however, both receiving Judyth's story and interpreting it. No one is being compelled toward any predetermined conclusion, but I am doing everything I can to make the kind of resources that can assist us in understanding what we are learning from her and why it is so important to understanding the accused assassin but also the methods of our intel ops available here. Having created this thread, I am doing everything I can to make it a data-rich and intellectually informative experience. But that is not his approach.

Mentioning the moon hoax or 9/11 as other examples of THE BIG LIE from our government is no disservice to Judyth. And citing an hypothesis that was enunciated by Eustice Mullins is not an obfuscation of her story. That Adrian Mack would treat them as though they made a crucial difference to understanding and appreciating what she has to say is both misleading and dishonest. They are, like JFK, examples of THE BIG LIES that our American government has advanced to deceive and manipulate the citizens of this country in the pursuit of its political agenda. The force of attacking me for even mentioning them derives from the presumption that most members of this forum do not accept them, which is a modest example of the fallacy known as the appeal to popular sentiments: since most people believe X, it follows that X must be true. If most members of this forum happened to believe that the moon landings took place and that 19 Islamic fundamentalists hijacked four commercial carriers, outfoxed the most sophisticated air defense system in the world, and performed these atrocities under the control of a man in a cave in Afghanistan, then he can impugn my character and tarnish me as a credible source by claiming that my views are outlandish and unsupported.

An even more blatant example has merged from his grotesque exaggerations about Eustice Mullins and his insinuations that anyone who should mention him is somehow diminishing Judyth and her story in his attempt to trash my psy ops expert. But discounting an hypothesis because of its source is a classic example of the ad hominem fallacy. Even assuming that Eustice Mullins is a bad person, it remains the case that even bad people can say things that are true. And I have already explained that my psy ops expert drew on that remark (without thereby meaning to imply he was endorsing every other view represented by his source) because it seems to fit Judyth's case and explain at least in part why she has been subjected to forms of hounding and harassment that otherwise appear out of proportion to the threat she might pose as someone who knew the alleged assassin up close and personal. Even Jack White, no fan of Judyth, has acknowledged that this makes her situation more plausible. But as a professor of critical thinking, I am in awe of the guy who could pack such an elaborate smear as "managed to associate Judyth Baker with chemtrails, moon-landing hoaxes, exotic mega-double-top-secret-super-soldiers, and now a jew hating nutcase" into a single sentence!

So I have no illusions about who I am dealing with. Adrian Mack appears to be a very clever fellow who would have you believe that discussing what has been happening to Judyth and why it might be important in itself should not take place on this forum. He scrambles the eggs to such an extent that he even insinuates that the members of this forum are unable to discriminate between Judyth's reports, my comments, and the observations of my expert. Could any claim be LESS WARRANTED when I have so clearly demarcated who is speaking in every post? This man is playing the members of this forum for saps. He has an agenda, which is to smear me, discredit my expert, and trash Judyth. He has gone so far as to suggest that I don't even belong on my own thread, where I am presenting Judyth's posts after making minor corrections and occasional tweaks--which she later reviews--on behalf of a woman who is nearly blind, in need of new glasses, and who is using a computer equipped with a Hungarian keyboard! And do not miss his intent: Were I to post Judyth's reports WITHOUT MAKING SUCH OBVIOUS CORRECTIONS, HE WOULD FIND THEM EASIER TO RIDICULE AND DISMISS. Adrian Mack, I am convinced, is not seeking the truth and does not have Judyth's best interests at heart. It is obvious to me that he has an agenda that is contrary to the aims and objectives of this thread and of this forum.

[Jan Klimkowski]

When an Adrian Mack has such an obvious agenda to subvert an historic thread on a forum that was founded, in large measure, to exclude hacks, shills, and trolls, it baffles me that he should be given such a wide latitude to practice his skills.

Jim - unfortunately this thread began with a major attack on Judyth by a hugely experienced researcher and a long-time collaborator of your good self: one Jack White.

Jack accused Judyth of having Munchausens Syndrome, and was moderated by DPF for this claim which is both against forum rules and which is beyond his area of expertise and competence. Jack then wrote as follows:

This whole thread is irrelevant
and only diverts attention away from more important matters.
I don't care about JVB at all.

Edited by the moderators to comply with forum rules.

, in my opinion...IF I am allowed to
have an opinion.

Jack

However, the thread was then continued by its protagonists in a combative fashion.

It is inevitable that sometimes the tone of a thread will be set by its major participants. In such circumstances, moderation is inappropriate until forum rules have been clearly breached.

Adrian Mack, I am convinced, is not seeking the truth and does not have Judyth's best interests at heart. It is obvious to me that he has an agenda that is contrary to the aims and objectives of this thread and of this forum.

All participants in this thread should stick to exploring Judyth's claims and evaluating them according to evidence which can substantiate or damage those claims. This includes third party participants such as the anonymous "psy ops expert", whose views are being posted here without he or she being identified.

Personally, I look forward to hearing Judyth's interpretations of some of John Armstrong's painstakingly gathered material, now that she has access to it. Judyth's observations in turn could then be evaulated, fairly and rigorously, by other researchers with expertise and knowledge in this area. Others, including Judyth, could respond.

And so the fundamentally crucial dialectic of research continues.

However, DPF will not tolerate accusations made without evidence such as, for instance, the claim that a potentially key witness has a psychological condition, or that an area of research is irrelevant. If a researcher considers subject x irrelevant, he or she is free to ignore it.

[James H. Fetzer]

ABOUT DR. WATTS WEBB, ONE OF JACK RUBY'S PHYSICIANS:

JUDYTH WRITES:

Dr. Watts Webb was one of Jack Ruby's most important doctor at Parkland. Brought in to Parkland for the occasion, researcher Linda Minor has brought out the fact that in 1962, Webb was involved with cystic fibrosis research. George DeMohrenschildt was involved in setting up a national cystic fibrosis foundation that involved Jackie Kennedy, I believe, as an honorary board member, which, of itself, means little. However, an article about freezing hearts, with the same doctor involved, is of concern:



I have reason to believe that the bioweapon we worked with was brought to Texas. I had to send glycerides and other chemicals to Mound Park Veteran's Hospital, and from there it went on to New Orleans and, we fear, sent on to Texas.



These rare glyceride compounds were used in liquid nitrogen freezing experiments.

Webb in 1965, before Ruby's death, is seen working with liquid nitrogen, freezing human hearts, etc. The bioweapon was placed in deep freeze and very few people were working with liquid nitrogen at the time. This doctor was in research actively. What was he doing 'taking care of' Jack Ruby? Answer, he is here because Ruby has cancer, but note: it was also said that they thought Ruby's cancer came from the pancreas.



How did they come to that conclusion?

Under the microscope, the monkey-virus-morphed cancer cells we had worked with originally came from a human pancreas, as I've said for years--and were modified and passed through mice, then primates, finally human(s) to create a galloping lung cancer.

They were very surprised at autopsy to find Jack Ruby's pancreas was not cancerous. It was all in his lungs (of course).

Watts could have had access to the frozen bioweapon. Jack Ruby insisted he was being injected with cancer cells--he knew from us in New Orleans that such was possible--and Al Maddox is on record about it. We have an article showing ruby told multiple people that he had been injected.



The immune system would fight it off for some time, but Ruby was ill with a 'cold'--possibly his immune system fighting off the cancer--when he was taken from prison too weak to be transferred out of state for his new trial.

I saw newspaper articles re Ruby's 'cough' went under x-ray. He was in that room for 45 minutes, long enough for multiple exposures. He was soon reported with a 'dry cough', which is consistent with reactions to overexposure to x-rays.

He died less than a month later--precise time frame for our prisoner(s) at Jackson. According to the internet, Watts is still alive.

JVB

[Adrian Mack]

Another question for Dr. Fetzer, and one that I hope he'll answer this time:

Has Judyth at any point identified herself as a 'TI' or 'Targeted Individual'?

[James H. Fetzer]

MORE ON BIOWEAPONS DEVELOPMENT AND ALL THAT

JUDYTH WRITES:

Dear Jim,

Edward T. Haslam has investigated the matter from the bioweapon end.



He wrote, quite aptly, that the affair between Lee H. Oswald and Judyth Baker that "60 Minutes" wanted to bring out--and wanted badly to bring out! They tried three times. I kept revealing more and more information about a bioweapon.

They did not want to go there.

Haslam called it "the 600 pound gorilla" staring them in the face.



Perhaps it is the combination of the LHO link WITH the bioweapon that has caused so many problems, because some of the same people were involved in both areas.

Consider:

1) A very wealthy and famous doctor, Alton Ochsner, with strong ties to the CIA, Big Oil and the Military and a right-winger whose best-friends list reads like the roster of everyone suspected of plotting to kill JFK--even including the owner of the building in which Oswald is located---is secretly working to try to develop an answer to the monkey-virus-contaminated polio vaccine that caused the death of his own grandson.



2) At his side is famed cancer research scientist and surgeon Dr. Mary Sherman. Some of her friends' careers were destroyed because they were whistleblowers about the contaminated polio vaccine that took Ochsner's grandson' s life. She shared a common interest in his crusade.



3) Scientist Bernice Eddy and others had been politically destroyed for demonstrating that polio vaccine injections were killing monkeys. It was soon learned that a cancer-causing monkey virus had been allowed to contaminate the polio vaccine--a virus that caused cancer in monkeys and other mammals.



4) Today, 60% of cancer tumors checked for the monkey virus check positive. This virus was not present in the world's population before millions of doses of polio vaccines were manufactured using contaminated monkey kidney tissues to grow the polio virus on. Children born to parents who got the contaminated vaccine also have the virus.

5) Haslam established the secrecy of the project.

6) It was realized that population control could be in the hands of those who administer vaccines with certain viruses added. Because many viruses lie latent until triggered by a low immune system, stress, etc., nobody would connect a vaccine with cancer or some other 'natural' disease. Even live cancer cells can be injected without being seen.

7) Around 1962, Ochnser announces that doctors must get into the fight against communism--he has already the co-founded INCA. He is now in charge of 'roasting' monkey virus infected cancers, trying to find an answer to the polio vaccine problem, and realizes he has the chance to create a bioweapon at about the same time the Bay of Pigs occurred.

8) Ochsner had trained doctors now isolated in Cuba and cut off. They are angry at Castro for losing prestigious training opportunities in the US and resent being sent to the USSR instead. Ochsner has contacts in Cuba who could deliver a bioweapon for use against Castro.

9) Ochsner has been closest to Clint Murchison, Hoover, Clay Shaw, LBJ, CIA founder Donovan, Nixon, and important military figures as well. His list of closest friends reads like a roster for JFK assassination ring suspects.

Ochsner was in charge of JFK's May 1962, visit to New Orleans and has collected medical info and security info on JFK.



10) Oswald becomes deeply embroiled in the plot to kill Castro. (To me it does not matter whether or not this was simply to get LHO to Mexico City. He was sent to Mexico City and he tried to fulfill his mission there, while he was actually being set up.) He carries a bioweapon developed by Ochsner's underground scientists with him. At several points, relative unknowns are involved to break the links and keep key persons isolated from each other in the two worlds of espionage and bioweapons. Oswald was one of few who was linked to both and, for that reason, his elimination was necessary.

11) The bioweapon leaves Ochsner's hands in Houston when LHO passes through there and is given a second container in exchange for what he has brought from New Orleans (fresher bioweapon materials). Haslam suggests that the real bioweapon at this time may have left LHO's hands and a prop was sent with him down to Mexico City. There are pros and cons on this consideration.

12) New information: LHO meets with somebody he had had known in the USSR, who was Cuban, in his attempt to find his contact. Many events occur, some blurred due to impersonations that later can be used to frame Oswald.

13) Those who maneuvered Oswald to Mexico City were also later enticing him into the assassination ring and allowing him to feel he had saved the president at least once, which kept him in position. It is suggested that we do not think this branch of the plot to kill Kennedy knew about his involvement with the bioweapon.

BUT now the government is informed that they dare not BLAME LHO in Mexico City and push the Castro connection.

WHY?

14) if LHO's true mission there were uncovered--lured to Mexico City with the bioweapon--then Oswald as anti-Castro would be exposed, and the plot to kill Castro would be exposed. Ochsner would be exposed and the entire plot against Kennedy, which began in New Orleans, would reach over to Dallas through Ochsner's many links in Dallas. They all point to a cabal and a Coup.

15) Ochsner, very aware of the danger, IMMEDIATELY brings out a recording where LHO is trumpeted as being a Marxist: "Portrait in Red". Garrison suspects Ferrie and questions him, but the FBI takes over and lets Ferrie go.

16) Mexico City inquiries shut down and a fake photo, etc., is sent. The impersonations and so on are shoveled out of sight. LHO MUST appear as a lone nut with no connections. Any connection to a girlfriend, Banister, Ferrie, Ochsner, and so forth is buried under bland Rely records. 'Evidence' that LHO is 'stupid,' a 'loser' and prone to violence is manufactured or enhanced.

17) On Nov. 22 LHO removes his wedding ring and leave money for Marina. If he escapes alive, he will go to Laredo and from there had access to a plane. He and Judyth Baker will secretly marry and hide out awhile.

18) But LHO is betrayed in a movie theatre where he goes from seat to seat, apparently looking for his contact to get him to a small airport. Police swarm the theatre and he is arrested and soon charged with JFK's murder. A policeman is also killed to make the Dallas police revved up enough to shoot LHP on the spot, but he eludes death.

19) We have Clay Shaw and Dean Andrews, an attorney in New Orleans, plus more, moving in to 'help' LHO. An offer to provide an attorney from the Mafia occurs, masked just enough so Jack Ruby, who knows about the secret labs, is forced to shoot LHO, a man he actually knew and liked.

20) LHO now can't talk and can be blamed as a 'lone nut' for JFK's murder, though LHO is on record as admiring JFK. He can be used as a Castro-lover/Communist to provoke war against the USSR or to invade Cuba.

Continued . . .

[Adrian Mack]

And another observation:

I read Dr. Mary's Monkey a few years ago, so forgive me if my memory is hazy, but Haslam's premise is that the first polio vaccine was contaminated with a monkey virus that caused soft tissue cancers in some recipients. Baker was involved with Ochsner and Dr. Mary Sherman in secretly developing a vaccine while also working on the weaponization of cancer, specifically as part of an anti-Castro operation.

Ed Haslam does NOT suggest a larger collusion in which "big medicine, big pharma, and the cancer society may share an interest in keeping cancer a profitable business", correct?

[James H. Fetzer]

MORE ON BIOWEAPONS DEVELOPMENT AND ALL THAT

JUDYTH WRITES:

SOME REPETITION FOR CONTINUITY (WITH IMAGES)

WHY?

14) if LHO's true mission there were uncovered--lured to Mexico City with the bioweapon--then Oswald as anti-Castro would be exposed, and the plot to kill Castro would be exposed. Ochsner would be exposed and the entire plot against Kennedy, which began in New Orleans, would reach over to Dallas through Ochsner's many links in Dallas. They all point to a cabal and a Coup.

15) Ochsner, very aware of the danger, IMMEDIATELY brings out a recording where LHO is trumpeted as being a Marxist: "Portrait in Red". Garrison suspects Ferrie and questions him, but the FBI takes over and lets Ferrie go.



16) Mexico City inquiries shut down and a fake photo, etc., is sent. The impersonations and so on are shoveled out of sight. LHO MUST appear as a lone nut with no connections. Any connection to a girlfriend, Banister, Ferrie, Ochsner, and so forth is buried under bland Rely records. 'Evidence' that LHO is 'stupid,' a 'loser' and prone to violence is manufactured or enhanced.

. . . .

21) The bioweapon is safely in the hands of the US govt's secret agencies at this point, for use on targets anywhere: Jack Ruby gets injected with cancer cells. He knows all about it and tells people, but nobody will believe him.



Today reports of injected cancer have come from many sources, but in late 1999, John McAdams tells his newsgroup that Dr. Mary Sherman was not a cancer researcher, and that somebody at his university has assured him that people can't get cancer via injections.





22) Back in 1963, Johnson creates Vietnam War and Agent Orange is employed, which is itself a bioweapon.

23) Bioweapon enhancement continues and we believe AIDS came from it or similar. There is much to say on this topic. Spurious claims that it originated earlier were based on normal rates of generators, not on enhanced rates by using radiation to create 'monsters.'

24) Nixon pulls all virus study and bioweapon development in cancer to Fort Detrick. He declares a "War on Cancer" but in fact, bioweapon development using cancer and viruses go underground where nobody can see what's going on anymore--



25) Bioweapon development continues under cover.

26) Baker shows that the bioweapon developers were involved in the Kennedy assassination and in particular exposes Ochsner and backs up what Haslam had found. Haslam had not connected all the dots between a bioweapon, the accused assassin's role in it, how the bioweapon was removed from Ochsner's control, and the murder of LHO primarily to make certain he never breathed a word about New Orleans. He could not connect the dots because he needed a link in the secret labs who would stand forth as a witness.



27) Baker, stung by Oliver Stone's movie "JFK", where she read words saying that we are cowards if we remain silent, decided to speak out before it was too late.

Then all hell broke loose over Baker's head, as she knew it would.

Comment: Ruth Paine and Michael Paine know a great deal.

What is being developed currently is aimed at population control methods disguised as virus attacks ('flu') but the vaccines being used may contain latent killer viruses for population control. At any time they can be added to infect a selected population. The simian monkey virus and its endless combinations lie in wait for years before creating cancer or something else.

This is my take, though rough and incomplete. . . .

[James H. Fetzer]

Adrian,

We have a subject of great interest, Judyth Vary Baker, who knows a great deal about the accused assassin of JFK. I invited a psy ops expert to take a look at her case. He is not speaking for her, but is talking about her case as part of a pattern typical of intel ops. The phrase, "TI" (targeted individual) is one used by intel ops and those who analyze them. Judyth has reported on the kinds of abuse to which she has been subjected, which is characteristic of TIs. But she wouldn't be expected to use that phrase to describe herself.

It probably had not occurred to Ed Haslam at the time to hypothesize that Judyth might be a target because she poses a threat to big medicine, big pharma, and cancer societies. But after this thread, it would not surprise me at all. I am just the least bit perplexed that you seem to have so much difficulty in sorting out between JUDYTH'S EXPERIENCES and COMMENTS ABOUT JUDYTH'S EXPERIENCES. Maybe that explains what I consider to have been some of the oddities about your posts. Just pay attention to the sources that I cite.

Jim

And another observation:

I read Dr. Mary's Monkey a few years ago, so forgive me if my memory is hazy, but Haslam's premise is that the first polio vaccine was contaminated with a monkey virus that caused soft tissue cancers in some recipients. Baker was involved with Ochsner and Dr. Mary Sherman in secretly developing a vaccine while also working on the weaponization of cancer, specifically as part of an anti-Castro operation.

Ed Haslam does NOT suggest a larger collusion in which "big medicine, big pharma, and the cancer society may share an interest in keeping cancer a profitable business", correct?

[Jan Klimkowski]

Adrian,

We have a subject of great interest, Judyth Vary Baker, who knows a great deal about the accused assassin of JFK. I invited a psy ops expert to take a look at her case. He is not speaking for her, but is talking about her case as part of a pattern typical of intel ops. The phrase, "TI" (targeted individual) is one used by intel ops and those who analyze them. Judyth has reported on the kinds of abuse to which she has been subjected, which is characteristic of TIs. But she wouldn't be expected to use that phrase to describe herself.

This is entirely correct.

I have spent over two decades investigating the covert operations loosely categorized as MK-ULTRA, but in reality involving dozens, perhaps hundreds, of different operations, both in the USA and the UK.

I have also personally interviewed over forty people who consider themselves to be survivors of such covert operations, either as children or adults.

The phrase "TI" (targeted individual) is exactly as described by Jim as above.

Use of such a phrase by an individual to describe themselves usually suggests that they have read some of the technical or, perhaps, popular literature in this area.

However, beyond that, whether an individual describes themselves as a TI or not, throws little light on the ultimate truth of their situation.

[Adrian Mack]

It probably had not occurred to Ed Haslam at the time to hypothesize that Judyth might be a target because she poses a threat to big medicine, big pharma, and cancer societies. But after this thread, it would not surprise me at all. I am just the least bit perplexed that you seem to have so much difficulty in sorting out between JUDYTH'S EXPERIENCES and COMMENTS ABOUT JUDYTH'S EXPERIENCES. Maybe that explains what I consider to have been some of the oddities about your posts. Just pay attention to the sources that I cite.

I'm trying to pay attention to the sources you cite but your opinions keep getting in the way.

I'd also be very interested in Haslam's response to your untested hypothesis which you borrowed from the anti-Semite Eustace Mullens, and which you seem determined to attach to a scenario that doesn't need it. Especially after all the years he spent in honest research. Perhaps you'd like to freight Haslam's work with some pet theories Larouche pulled out of his ass too.

I guess I'm just the least bit perplexed that you don't get what I'm saying so here it is again:

You are taking advantage of your role as Judyth's mouthpiece to front for the kind of bullshit that could potentially make her look worse. The facts of her harassment, the coordinated attacks by the McAdams crew, and the indication via Viklund that there is some official sanction for this treatment is all plenty enough.

But you and Jim Pt. 2 can't leave it at that, which indicates either no confidence in her ability to represent herself or a desire to drive opinion in a predetermined direction.

So which is it?