26-04-2010, 02:20 AM
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]
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]