Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[James H. Fetzer]

JUDYTH RESPONDS TO BARB JUNKKARENIN

Back in 1963, there was no Cancun, as Barb and Rottweilers have made clear over and over for years, but I always meant "KanKun", which everybody then wrote as "Cancun", which McAdams & clan have driven into the ground -- that this was an anachronism.

And on this single word hangs their entire claim, ignoring witnesses alive and dead-- and much more. They will find something else. What they say is, "We have raised all these objections and you still believe her?", as if the most if not all of the objections they raised have not been met with reasonable explanations. Then they say, "She always explains her way out of it!", as if my having to explain things means I am not telling the truth. It is a twisted kind of illogic:

1) We bring up lots of objections;
2) She has to explain them away;
3) But she has to explain too many things (what we bring up); therefore,
4) She must be telling a most improbable 'yarn' and should not be believed.

This is their means to discredit me, that even if I explain every objection, here are too many objections...However, it is they who are creating what in almost every case are simply ARTIFICIAL OBJECTIONS.

1) Some are based on literal readings, such as Johann Rush assuming that when I said "bulky camera" were brought to the leaf- letting scene at the trade mart, that I HAD to mean one of those huge rolling news cameras used for major events -- Huh? For a leafletting going on on a street corner? I am the daughter of a TV station half-owner and so I went to the Internet to show what I meant and Rush called it "reprehensible" to try and find something to match my description -- which turned out to describe the kind of camera he had almost exactly! -- Or that "Cancun" excluded any other name, when I literally meant "KanKun". In fact, it strengthens my testimony, because I have insisted there was a KanKun village and area there, and Linda Minor has provided the proof.

or,

2) They are based on insufficient knowledge, causing them to jump to conclusions, such as Lifton thinking he knew Lee Oswald brought a suit with him because he was described as wearing a suit on April 26...When I knew the real situation, as a witness who was there, and have INSISTED, as he stresses, that Lee was not dressed in a suit (though I did say he was very neat and clean-cut looking, although I think his pants were somewhat wrinkled)...Still, they were very clean...Nor did Lifton bother to ask me what time Lee and I met which, as I have thoroughly documented, was early in the day.

or, worst of all,

3) They are based on things others say I said, such as things Jack White has posted, or on their 'memory' of what I said -- which they spread far and wide when they converse with each other, so that fine researchers such as Jim Dieugenio will not even look at anything I have to say....Including such hearsay, as: "Look, she was ejected from DellaRosa's forum for being abusive there." So that I have had to laboriously prove, by going through endless old emails, to show it was not true..draining my eyesight and strength and will to keep fighting, because this has been going on for a decade.

For the first time I have skilled help, and God knows I am grateful that I am not being buried under McAdams & Co's hearsay and false statements...

God bless you!

---------------------------

Barb is just inserting herself to stop the information flow.

Note on attached map that Playa del Carmen, near Cozumel, is in Quinano Roo, but actually not very far from the Yucatan, and the name of the book describing Chichen Itza that was popular in 1963 (summer) was based upon old travel books that did not make the distinction modern books do.



We of course wanted to see it all. Lee said there was a CIA presence in Merida and we would be able to become informants in that area, go to school perhaps in Merida or even in Mexico city -- time would tell...

As I have said, we planned to make a trek through the whole area. I have given you quotes from George Demohremschildt. There are many pyramids...And Chichen-Iza was in the news in 1963...

We were also interested in Cozumel which Barb calls changing the story. She does not seem to understand that we intended to explore all we could. Below is an example of the area we were interested in:



Playa del Carmen owes its growing popularity to the nearby resort town of Cancún, just 40 miles to the north, and Cozumel Island, just 12 miles to the east....

Cozumel, called Ah Cuzamil Petén, meaning "island of the swallows," by the Mayans, was a sacred site and home to Ix-Chel, the goddess of fertility and wife of Itzámna, the god of the sun. Young women across the Mayan empire, from present-day Yucatán, Honduras, Belize, and beyond, journeyed to Cozumel on a sacred pilgrimage to pay homage to Ix-Chel and pray for fertility and healthy childbirth.

Meanwhile, on a sheltered sandbar known to the Mayans as "Kankun," the temples of El Rey were constructed as a ceremonial site and resting place for the society's nobles. The site is adjacent to a golf course and across the highway from what is now the Hilton Hotel, making it a popular destination for visitors to Cancún who want to experience the Mayan ruins but are not able to get to the more major sites in the region, such as Tulum, Cobá, or Chichén Itzá

Kankun, which means "nest of snakes," did not have many other sacred sites since it was so narrow and did not have good access to the mainland, though the ocean breezes and proximity to various shallow lagoons did make it a nice place to live for the natives who fished along its shores and harvested food from the mangroves.

JIM, THIS WAS THE VILLAGE THAT WE WERE INTERESTED IN.

"CANCUN" ITSELF ALSO MEANS 'NEST OF SNAKES" AND WAS USED TO DESCRIBE THE CITY.

TO CONTINUE:

John L. Stephens and Frederick Catherwood passed through the Riviera Maya in 1842 as part of their expedition to the Mayan ruins, which was documented in their excellent book, Incidents of Travel in Yucatán.

BUT WE WERE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO REACH THIS VLLAGE FROM CHICHEN ITZA? AND WHY IS THE CITY CANCUN CALLED CANCUN, BUT THAT THE AREA WAS DEDICATED TO KANKUN?

Playa del Carmen and the surrounding area kept a low profile for the rest of the 1800s. In 1902 the region was finally granted status as a territory of the country of Mexico, and it was named after Gen. Andreas Quintana Roo, of the Mexican army.

Cozumel was used as a base by the U.S. Navy during World War II and was then abandoned again ...

The single most important factor in the development of the region came in 1967, when the Bank of Mexico and the country's tourism development commission identified Cancún as the location for one of its mega-development projects (along with Ixtapa, Los Cabos, Loreto, and Huatulco). In the original government documents, the area was called "Kan Kun," which quickly morphed into the more Spanish "Can Cun," and then eventually shortened to just "Cancún."

http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=377444323852

NOW, BARB CAN SPLIT HAIRS ALL SHE WANTS TO, BUT SHE OBVIOUSLY HASN’T SEEN THIS MORE COMPLETE HISTORY OF THE AREA..... I EXPLAINED THAT WE WERE INTERESTED IN THE VILLAGE OF KANKUN, THAT WE INTENDED TO VISIT CHICHEN-IZA, AND HOPED TO MARRY AND STAY AT A FINE HOTEL (MAYBE A JOKE OF LEE'S) IN THE AREA. MERIDA WAS ALSO MENTIONED.



THAT IS A HECK OF A LOT OF TERRITORY, BUT WE WERE PLANNING A TERRIFIC JOURNEY. WE BELIEVED NEAR THE END WE WOULD HAVE TO HIDE OUT IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS, OR MAYBE EVEN THE CANARY ISLANDS, UNTIL LEE COULD WORK OUT HOW TO GET US INTO UNIVERSITIES AS STUDENTS WITH DR. SHERMAN'S HELP.

BUT UP TO THE LAST MINUTE, WE STILL HAD HOPES OF GOING THROUGH QUINTANA ROO AND SEEING SUCH VILLAGES AS KANKUN (WHICH WE READ ABOUT IN A JOURNAL) AND TO CLIMB CHICHEN ITZA AND MANY OTHER TEMPLE MOUNDS.

THEY HAVE TO MAKE IT ALL AS SET IN STONE. WHAT WAS 'SET IN STONE' WAS THAT, IF LEE MADE IT TO THE YUCATAN, I WOULD MEET HIM HERE. THE REST WOULD HAVE BEEN A TOUR OF THE AREA, THEN WE WOULD HAVE GONE INTO HIDING FOR A YEAR.

HERE IS THE BOOK THAT WAS FEATURED IN TULANE'S LIBRARY LATE SUMMER 1963:

Stephens, John Lloyd. Incidents of Travel in Yucatan. (two volumes, 1843) popularized Chichen Itza. Reissue, NY: Dover, 1963. ISBN 9780486209272

Incidents of Travel in Yucatan, Vol. 1 by John Lloyd Stephens PUBLICATION JUNE, 1963

---------------------------



----------------------------
I admit that our adventure sounds far out, but I was making plans with a man who penetrated the iron curtain when he was still 19 years old -- and anyone who personally knows me understands that, though young then, it is in conformity with a love for adventure and archaeology that eventually ended with a degree in same...it was a grand escape plan and I am very sorry it didn't happen.

See the following, by the way...about my running archaeological digs myself...Here is one from 1998, before all such stopped after I was injured in Dallas...I was using the name "AVARY BAKER" while living in Louisiana teaching at University of LA at Lafayette.... because I was afraid to use the name "JUDYTH".



I had to register as Judyth Vary Baker due to regulations, but everywhere it said 'AVARY BAKER" (ANNE IS MY MIDDLE NAME, VARY THE DREADED MAIDEN NAME I WISHED TO HIDE), therefore, 'Avary', which was sometimes misspelled by my students as "Avery" of course...Now I made this 'name change' in 1996, when I moved there, well before speaking out about Lee Oswald. And people should ask, why did I use a name that I'd never used before, when moving to Louisiana? Which was because I had reason to be afraid.

I taught English composition to freshmen and sophs, drama and poetry, and some continuing education classes, such as his one...All of that vanished after speaking out, and my dissertation was not allowed to be read. Nor was I allowed to present papers at conferences in the university's name anymore. I was removed as editor of The Southwestern Review and a woman called Jessica replaced me.

In the end, I lost my doctorate, which I thought was unassailable as I had a 3.9 and passed all comps and orals and my second language...But they got me. They wrecked my career.

Here in "The Times" you can see that I used "Avery" on July 25, 1998, 5 months before I decided to speak out.

Note that it says the dig would resume in November. But my daughter was getting married, and I had to put it off. The day after she left for her honeymoon, I saw the film "JFK". I had to speak out after finally seeing what a mess everything was, how much they had messed, how much had been buried in lies.

And I was scared so much, my hands shook as I got out the evidence and laid it out on the bed, wondering if I could find any witnesses to substantiate my statements, wondering how many false documents would hide the real Lee, who had actually tried to save Kennedy.

--------------------------

[quote name='Barb Junkkarinen' date='Mar 28 2010, 10:54 PM' post='188079']
[quote name='James H. Fetzer' post='188071' date='Mar 28 2010, 08:30 PM']Another claim that she made that he could not believe was the
story of them meeting for a rendevous at a hotel in the middle
of the jungle in Mexico in the resort of Cancun, which he found
incredible, especially since Cancun did not exist at the time. As
Judyth has explained in post #665 on page 45, the hotel was not
situated in the city of Cancun but in the village called Kan Kun,
where it has existed since the 1930s. Lifton made a mistake
over the phone, because they are both pronounced the same.

HE ONLY TELLS YOU TO FOCUS ON "CANCUN" AS HE HEARD IT
OVER THE PHONE. I WAS CRUCIFIED OVER THAT ISSUE UNTIL
DEB BERT AND OTHERS NOTED THAT MAYALAND WAS BUILT
RIGHT THERE AT CHICHEN-IZA, WHERE I SAID LEE AND I
WOULD MEET. LOOK AT A MAP AND POINT YOUR FINGER
HERE -- THE OLD MAPS WE LOOKED AT SAID "KANKUN",
THE NEW ONES SAY THE CITY "CANCUN". And she's right![/quote]

Just a little geographic orientation regarding Cancun ...kan-kun ... and the Mayaland hotel. The above reads as if the Mayaland is in close proximity to Quintana Roo where Cancun is located. It is not. Chichen Itza and the Mayaland hotel are not in Cancun, or Kan-kun ... nowhere near.
Chichen Itza and the Mayaland Hotel are located in the middle of the jungle in the state of Yucatan.

Cancun is located in the state of Quintana Roo. Quintana Roo did not become a state until 1974, but it was an officially named territory as of 1902.

Who cares about Quintana Roo? Judyth, who wrote:

I began to fantasize about my hoped-for escape to Quintana Roo.
In my dreams, I climbed Mayan pyramids with hinds´ feet in high places,
Lee laughing by my side, the wind blowing our hair awry, and colorful
birds flying in great processioned wheels around us, their cries of joy
mingled with ours. I would feel Lee´s touch, that certain way he had of
tracing just so across my hip, and I would wake smiling -- to a void.


Martin Shackelford posted the above in June 2004, noting:
Here is the reference from the original manuscript from 1998--BEFORE the
agent began fooling with it:


No Mayaland hotel or Chichen Itza in Quintana Roo.

I posted this in that same 2004 thread:

"State of Quintana Roo

Quintana Roo's
Coat of Arms
In this day and age, the state of Quintana Roo, home to Cancun, is
synonymous with tourism. It is impossible to believe that just 40
years ago Quintana Roo was "the most savage and wild coast of the
American continent." It was a territory with no local government and
no roads, accessible only by sea or on foot."


http://www.akumalrental.com/about_akumal/quin_roo.html


I just tried the link at it no longer goes anywhere.

It is an 111 mile, 2-1/2 to 3 hr drive from Cancun to Chitzen Itza/Mayaland *today* on the highway. There were no roads in 1963 as noted in the cite above. People going to the Mayaland Hotel used to be taken from where they got off their ship in the little port of Progress, through the jungle, to the Mayaland.

Here is a map that shows where all of these places are:

http://www.mayaland.com/History.php

This is the map the Mayaland Hotel has on its site. One can also read their history on this site as well.

When the Cancun thing became an issue, and the "kan-kun" explanation did not fly, their intended destination became, Tulum, Merida, Chichen Itza ... and somewhere down the line, even Cozumel and the Cayman Islands (where Judyth said Oswald had sent money ahead for them) ... they all became,, in turn, the correct place.

The story about the laxatives strikes me as fascinating
on several counts, because with her knowledge about
medicine and physiology--wanting to have Lee out of
the picture on the day of the assassination but without
raising alarm among his associates--she came up with
a very practical and easily implemented solution to the
dilemma: create the simulation of a physical illness.

One has to wonder why it didn't occur to her that LHO didn't need to "similate illness" by actually giving himself diarrhea. :o
No potty police.

And the bottom line of all this laxative business is that, by Judyth's own account, she knew that shots were going to be fired at JFK in Dallas on November 22nd.

She did nothing. Not even an anonymous phone call to the police, the FBI or the Secret Service.

And a quick question ... does Judyth still claim to have been at the leafletting in New Orleans? There were claims about the dress one of the women were wearing, then it became a different woman, then it was found that the women were identified by someone who worked in the building. But since Johann Rush, the cameraman who actually filmed the incident for the news came forward and refuted her details about what people were wearing, the kind of TV camera used, etc ... does she still say she was there?

Thanks,
Barb :-)
[/quote]