Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

IN AN EARLIER POST, MESSAGE #167, JUDYTH DEALT WITH THESE CHARGES.

VIKLUND APPEARS TO BE GRANDSTANDING FOR THOSE WHO HAVE MISSED IT.

Judyth replies to Barb and to Jack about her "provisional political asylum"

Barb diverts focus. Her assignment is to 'prove' that I have lied ever since age fifteen.

Over a perod of a decade, Barb has never directly contacted me. Barb never asked to see my evidence. Barb never met me. Barb never spoke to me on the telephone.

But she is always alert to divert. Obsessed. Dedicated. Determined to discredit JVB.

Why?

1) it diverts people from the leads and information I am trying to provide.

2) IT STOPS DISCUSSION OF THE LEADS.

===What Barb wrote, and my reply====

"Martin had an unfortunate habit of running with things on Judyth's say so without checking them out. It cost him dearly."

REPLY: I told Martin what was really happening behind the scenes. Much of that was not in the official records. I described myself as being PROTECTED IN THE EU POLITICAL ASYLUM SYSTEMS. Sometimes I said protected in the system, sometimes I said protected in political asylum. It was not intended to become a lawyer's brief for Barb to pick apart, implying that I claimed I had been GRANTED same. She took the term "political asylum" and ran with it, never checking with me to see if I would have agreed with its use in that manner.

AS FOR BARB, SHE IS THE ONE WHO DID NOT DO HER HOMEWORK.

LET'S DO SOME HOMEWORK RIGHT NOW:

FIRST, I QUOTE FROM ANOTHER ASYLUM SEEKER (NOT ME):

"The first of these was to determine to which country I should go.

It could not be the United States, for this would embarrass Washington...

The immigration officers were most courteous at every point, but they

questioned me with meticulous care. Our interview required more than three hours.

Political asylum in Sweden requires formal approval at the cabinet level, hence

about one month was required to complete the certification...." (ref: A TASTE OF FREEDOM)

BARB IMPLIES I WAS TURNED DOWN BECAUSE I WAS NOT IN ANY DANGER.

HERE IS ANOTHER BIT OF HOMEWORK:

JUST A FEW MORE (THERE ARE MANY EXAMPLES):

1) A woman threatened to set herself on fire outside the County Court in central Gothenburg on Friday after she had her asylum application rejected....

2) United Nation refugee agency UNHCR has criticized Sweden's decision to deport Afghan refugees to Kabul even if they have no social or family ties in the capital city...

3) Recent decisions by Sweden to send refugees back to Baghdad and other war-ravaged areas have tarnished its reputation for welcoming victims of conflict, critics say...

4) A couple from Turkey seeking asylum in Sweden threatened to set themselves on fire in the Board of Migration's offices in Kiruna on Monday. After all-day negotiations they gave themselves up.

IT IS NOT THAT EASY TO GET POLITICAL ASYLUM IN SWEDEN. ONE IN A WHEELCHAIR WAS SENT BACK TO IRAQ, THOUGH HE HAD BEEN SHOT IN AN ATTEMPT TO KILL HIM, AND WAS PARALYZED BY THAT SHOT. A HOMOSEXUAL WAS SENT BACK TO IRAN WHERE HE WAS SURELY EXECUTED.

1) Dozens of people come daily to Sweden, seeking political asylum

2) Up to half are deported IMMEDIATELY and never enter the system

Why wasn't I immediately deported?

What people typically get deported immediately, before entering the system?

a) people from free countries, such as the United States

anyone suspected of trying to use the system for any other means except the need for self-protection

c) they must not come directly from any other Schengen Treaty country-.

NOTE: Most EU countries, including Hungary--are Schengen.

I CAME FROM HUNGARY AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN IMMEDIATELY DEPORTED TO THE HUNGARIAN POLITICAL ASYLUM SYSTEM.

I WAS NOT.

question: Since I came from Hungary, a Schengen country. WHY WASN'T I MMEDIATELTY DEPORTED BACK TO HUNGARY, TO HAVE THEM HANDLE MY REQUEST, SAVING SWEDEN A LOT OF MONEY AND INVESTIGATION TIME?

answer: I CAME WITH SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT MY LIFE WAS IN DANGER IN HUNGARY.

question: WHY WAS I NOT THEREFORE IMMEDIATELY DEPORTED TO MY HOME COUNTRY, THE UNITED STATES?

answer: I CAME WITH SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT MY LIFE WAS IN DANGER IN THE UNITED STATES.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

1) YOU ARE PLACED IN A LARGE PROCESSING BUILDING WITH DOZENS OF OTHERS, TYPICALLY FOR ONE OR TWO DAYS. In my case, so anxious were they, because I was an American, that I stayed there five days. I was then moved to a small town.

2) IF ACCEPTED INTO THE SYSTEM, YOU ARE THEN MOVED FROM THE RECEIVING COMPOUND INTO A SMALL, REMOTE TOWN AND GIVEN ALL YOU NEED, WHILE INVESTIGATIONS CONTINUE. THIS IS PROVISIONAL POLITICAL ASYLUM. THE PROVISIONS ARE: DEPENDING ON THE FIRST JUDGMENT IN YOUR CASE. YOU WILL STILL HAVE TWO EXTRA CHANCES TO APPEAL IF TURNED DOWN THE FIRST TIME.

BARB SAYS THERE IS NO PROVISIONAL ASYLUM IN SWEDEN.

BUT IF YOU PLUG IN "PROVISIONAL POLITICAL ASYLUM" ...BESIDES MY OWN, ON MY

SPACE...NOTE A FEW MORE FROM OTHER EU POLITICAL ASYLUM COUNTRIES:

MySpace Video - Suzi Q Service Dog 's Video Channel & VideoClips

<http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.channel&ContributorID=35424589>

PROVISIONAL POLITICAL ASYLUM MEANS YOU ARE PROTECTED AND HELPED WHILE THEY

LOOK INTO YOUR CASE TO SEE IF YOU CAN STAY PERMANENTLY. ATTACHED IS

MY 'FUNDS' CARD TO WHICH FUNDS ARE ADDED...USED AT THE BANK TO GET MONEY TO

LIVE ON...BUT OF COURSE, NO PERCENTAGE IS CHARGED...ALSO USED AS ID IN THE

SYSTEM.

NOTE: AT THIS TIME, BARB AND MCADAMS' PEOPLE WERE ACCUSING ME OF BEING AN

ILLEGAL ALIEN HIDING IN SWEDEN.

BARB FAILED TO MENTION THAT.

THIS IS WHY MARTIN AND PAMELA BROUGHT OUT THE INFORMATION.

YOU ARE NOT LOCKED UP. YOU GET LIVING QUARTERS, A FUNDS CARD, ETC. I HAVE

ATTACHED MINE. NOTE THE EXPIRATION DATE IS FAR BEYOND ONE MONTH. IT WAS

GOOD UNTIL JULY, 2008. I ENTERED THE SYSTEM SEPTEMBER, 2007.

result: I was not immediately deported back to Hungary.

I was not immediately deported back to the United States.

They promised to give me refuge, as they looked into the situation

more deeply. It is commonly called "provisional political asylum".

I was assigned a lawyer.

I was advised that because I was from the US, could never get

permanent political asylum.

The letter Barb refers to was an appointment letter to find out

when it would be possible for me to leave. I had already been there nine

months. I told them I needed another few weeks...my family had secured me

safe havens and we were going through paperwork.

They gave me the extra weeks.

I did not return to the US. I was never required to do so.

Furthermore, I am a welcome guest in Sweden and spent 49% of my time in that

country in a house my son purchased for my use there. Why would my family

do that, unless absolutely necessary?

I repeat: The entire effort had been cooperative, between me and the system,

to keep me as long as possible until I could get family and friends to

arrange safe places for me to live, as there was never a chance that I, a

non-combatant, age 65 at that time, and a 'free country' US citizen, could

stay 'forever'.

Barb DOES NOT KNOW THE SYSTEM. But she thinks she does and

misreports it to the world.

SHE SAYS AFTER ONE MONTH I WAS ORDERED TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY.

response:

This is true. What Barb fails to mention is that this was a routine order.

I was urged to publicize my case so that an appeal I was advised to make, to

buy me more time, would be taken seriously and would not be immediately

rejected. Such appeals do not always languish for months, as Barb has

insinuated elsewhere. A second appeal can be rejected at once.

What happened next?

1) I was given TV coverage and made an appeal to be allowed to stay in the

country. It was broadcast in Sweden on a TV station that is watched usually

only by Swedes. The appeal was then made by my assigned lawyer, and I was

asked how much time I needed. I told them until May 15. It turned out I'd

need even more time....they eventually gave me two extra months after May

15.... but had to call me in by June to officially ask me how it was all

going. That official 'letter' was to tell me I had to leave the country. I

came into the office a few weeks later and was asked how much more time

I needed. I told them I needed three more weeks. I got it.

When the official letter came, I had already been in Sweden nine months.

Barb, cuts months off in her own version. I left Sweden after ten-and-a-half

months. I was told that I was first American woman in decades to stay even

that long under the Swedish political asylum system.

I never deported or ordered to return to America. Instead, an apartment in a

non-EU nation was arranged for me by my family and children. In addition,

my son purchased a house for me in Sweeden in a very remote area. I had made

many friends in Sweden by that time, who have helped me and who call every

day to make sure I am still safe. They and my family have made great

sacrifices for my safety. It is hard to write today because my best friend

has died and I am overwhelmed with grief.

2) After the appeal was made, I was moved to a new town because my postbox

and door were both marked, and witnesses observed that I was followed and

photographed by foreigners, not Swedes. The witnesses are sensitive to

outsiders because we were all in political asylum seekers, all of us hoping

to get positives, not negatives.

They all knew I could never get a positive.

We existed under "Provisional political asylum" and were taken care of.

The Swedes not only moved me, they then gave me a fake name to use for

mail to protect me.

That did not stop Barb, McAdams, and company from hunting me down, once

they knew I was there.

By the way, BARB & CO found that obscure 4-minute TV broadcast in Swedish.

HOW? NOBODY knew a thing about it, except the Swedes...it was all in

Swedish. I was exhausted and had been terrorized by threats. I was still

walking with a cane due to an assault that occurred in the US earlier in the

year (not related to my circumstances, it was a student on drugs who hurt me

when I tried to stop her from stealing a book).

Does "provisional asylum" mean the "protection of a foreign government"? If so,

there ought to be some official documentation available.

Is she no longer under "Dankbaar asylum" in Amsterdam? What happened to

her LHO Museum there?

Why does she refuse to accept the massive 12 year documentation of John

Armstrong?

From 'Glenn Viklund' date='Mar 10 2010, 03:38 PM' post='186404']

First a note: All markings in bold and italic are done by me today.

Basic facts:

1. Judyth Vary Baker applied for political asylum in Sweden in the early fall of 2007.

2. This was denied later that fall.

3. She immediately appealed this decision.

4. This appeal was denied, in the early summer of 2008, and she had to leave the country shortly thereafter.

5. Her judicial status during this entire process was that of an asylum seeker.

End of story.

It is truly fantastic that these five simple, and crystal clear facts, can turn into something quite different. But just to remove any further question marks surrounding this issue, let me also point these things out:

1. JVB was granted nothing in Sweden. She received the same standard treatment as ALL other asylum seekers. The process is extremely well defined and easy to understand.

2. That is: She was granted no ”provisional political asylum”, because no such thing exists. In fact, she was granted nothing at all on top of what all asylum seekers are entitled to.

3. That also means that her files and documentation are publicly available – precisely as they are in ALL these cases.

4. She received no ”special treatment” whatsoever. No additional secrecy, no special benefits, economic or otherwise.

5. Her story – as fantastic as it may be – was dealt with according to the regular, standard process. No more, no less.

6. The only substancial, formal decisions authorites made in her case, was that she was denied political asylum, twice.

7. In accordance with the last denial, she had to leave the country. She complied and left the country shortly thereafter.

How do I know this? Because I obtained all documents from the two courts involved and read the entirety of this issue. It required perhaps 3 to 4 phone calls and something like 4 hours to do. So the effort should by no means be exaggerated. It's all well documented and leaves no room for misunderstandings. On top of this I also spoke with relevant officials on a couple of occasions. These documents were also provided to John McAdams and the mod forum.

. . .

[Jack White]

JVB wrote:

"I have explained that this was a trick question that involved Debra Conway

and my attempt to protect her reputation...This tells me clearly that Jack

White was prepped by Conway to ask this question, as nobody ever asked

it except Robert Chapman, who I thought at the time was trying to harm

Conway. I was trying to protect Conway and later gave a full answer to this

matter, explaining the circumstances.

However, it was a trap set by Conway.

I now know that Jack White was influenced by Debra Conway at that time,

whose many lies about me, and her blocking witness films, etc. in fact are

well known to my long-time research associates."

Hmmmmmmm... I have had no contact with Debra in the last ten years

or so. I have never talked with Debra about JVB. I do not even know her

position regarding JVB. Debra NEVER "prepped me" about anything regarding

JVB. I have no idea what this is all about...EXCEPT IT IS A CLEAR UNTRUTH!

I do not like people lying about me.

Jack

[Karl Kinaski]

ccc

Edited July 28, 2011 by Karl Kinaski

[Jack White]

I care not at all about JVB nor her claims, only about the damage she is doing to reputations

and research credibility. I have been looking back through some of her postings for untruths

or oddities, and noted this one:

[Barb Junkkarinen]

I note that ”provisional asylum” is still today a frequently used description in various forums, even though this term does not exist. ASYLUM SEEKER, folks. It really isn't that hard. Try it, it works and above all – it is the correct description of her status during her stay in Sweden. She provided an ID in this thread with a photo.”ASYLSÖKANDE”, which is the Swedish word for ASYLUM SEEKER.

You don't say? Hopefully that will put Pamela's and Martin's insistence that she had been granted "temporary" or "provisional" asylum to rest forever. That "asylum seeker" is the status has been explained to them several times, and the link to the website of the Migration board where it was explained very well was provided as well. I had never seen this ID card that Judyth had Fetzer post the other day before. How ironic the word is right on there. <g>

Here is the link to the translator I provided in an earlier post: http://translate.google.com/translate_t?hl=en#

ASYLSÖKANDE = ASYLUM SEEKERS

Translate text, webpages and documents

ASYLSÖKANDE

Translate from: Swedish

Swedish to English translation

ASYLUM SEEKERS

Welcome to the forum, Glenn, and thank you for such a clear, straightforward explanatory post. As a Swede, who took the time to speak to someone at the Migration Board about this case, and not only receive telephone information, but written confirmation and the documents themselves, AND who mentored an asylum seeker through the asylum process in 1987, your input cannot be dismissed out of hand.

Bests,

Barb :-)

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

MORE FROM JUDYTH ABOUT BIOWEAPONS: I appreciate Karl Kinaski's posts, because Judyth does have a story to tell--and, in my opinion, it is quite fascinating. She is a far more articulate, intelligent, and resourceful student of this case than at least 95% of the members of this forum. While I am convinced that she is "the real deal", even if she were not, her ability to marshal evidence for her interpretation of events is simply astounding and, based upon my experience, far exceeds that of her critics.

From Judyth:

I know a lot about the biowarfare efforts going on...I know the names of the doctors involved, as I saw their sign-off initials on our reports and I am not that stupid. I looked up the initials and saw how they were linked together...

There really was an Op to kill off Africans...One thing they did, and perhaps most important of all, is the monkeys we infected were sent to Haiti to get safely through Customs without tracing back to the US, then shipped back to Africa.

This is mind-blowing to me, because Haiti is where AIDS first showed up -- they cover this up as much as they can and try to tell people that a chimp, erx. bit somebody in Africa and that's how it spread. Nonsense. Those people were eating monkey brains and chimp flesh, etc., for centuries with no problem.

This critter was modified and let loose again in Africa.

I have shown the staff at Trine day as well as Ed how they did it, even when they did it.

They replaced the lost infected monkeys in fall of '63, around August 19th, with new monkeys shipped IN from Africa...I even remembered the newspaper article and made a xerox of it, which I have shared through the years with researchers, from the TYimes-Picayune, of course...And they shipped the monkeys in on a Sunday when nobody would notice...and had the article in the Sunday afternoon paper...

Today, you will hear that the AIDS precursors hail back to the 1930's.

This is not true, as a close look at the 'evidence' will reveal.

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

I didn't answer the second question. Re: Dr. Sherman.

I had been in contact with Dr. Ochsner beginning when I was only 15 years old, when I met him at the dedication of the Watson clinic and showed him my cancerous fish.

Mrs. Georgianna Watkins of the American Cancer Society, where I worked as a volunteer in her office helping hospital patients, took me to the dedication of the clinic to meet Dr. Ochsner.

I met him again at the Science Writers Seminar, where I crashed the seminar and met Nobel Prize winners, etc. Absolutely dedicated that they saw my work. It got in all the papers.

I enclose one such article.

Dr. Ochsner knew I had the nerve to work with him on something like his project.

I was only 17 when I crashed the exclusive seminar in St. Petersburg. They invited me back. I thus became the first high school student ever 'invited' to the seminar. This was the 4th Science Writer's Seminar ...I met three Nobel Prize winners. One of them paid for my transportation that summer to work at Roswell Park Institute directly under Dr. George H. Moore.

Moore and Ochsner were close friends. They testified in the same anti-smoking cases against big tobacco. I had given lung cancer to mice faster than had been done in any of the fancy labs, under primitive conditions.

They personally inspected my work, which is also mentioned in newspaper articles. Moore, Dr. Diehl, and Dr. Ochsner testified together in other court cases. They were close friends. Dr. Diehl's personal card is enclosed for your inspection. He was in charge of research for the American cancer society-and its funding.

I may be the only person in the world who has retained a card from Dr. Diehl. I saved it as part of the evidence to prove how close I was to the very top of the American Cancer Society's officials.

Dr. Ochsner was president of the American Cancer Society in their late 50's. Interestingly, his good friend "Wild Bill" Donovan, who founded the OS and was also the driving force to found the CIA, was Ochsner's close friend and also at the same time Ochsner was president. He was on several important access committees.

Finally, Donovan died at Walter Reed after being treated unsuccessfully in Ochsner's hospital--free of charge.

All these and many more details have been vetted by "60 Minutes", Marrs, Haslam, Shackleford, Platzman, Devries and Dankbaar....Greg Burnham saw some of it, too.

It is all plainly laid out in my book.

Edited March 11, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

MORE FROM JUDYTH ON CANCER RESEARCH AND BIOWEAPONS, PART II

Note that these seminars used to be very, very important and exclusive. It took 42 years to make the reports accessible to the public. The format has changed, though: it used to last longer and the reports could last up to 45 minutes and were extremely technical. There was no panel format.

=INTERNET REFERENCES ARE SLIGHT===

THE SEMINAR 4/1-6/1977 LASTED FIVE DAYS

THE SEMNAR April 5-10, 1963 LASTED FIVE DAYS

Writers seminar March 20 - 26 1976

==I CONTEND THE SEMINAR LASTED 5 1/2 days, but we can only find 5 days as dates everywhere else....The last half-day involved some special presentations and I cannot remember the press being present...They then came to my school and inspected my work...One was a Nobel prize winner, involved with bioweapon activity at University of Chicago, Dr. Urey...

A search on google tells you lots about the Nobelist:

As for the science writers' seminar, the article here shows it finally was opened to the public after 42 years, in a different format...The true breakthroughs and deep tests were no longer being revealed to science writers, btw...

Cancer Immunology

http://archderm.highwire.org/cgi/reprint/84/6/948.pdf

by L GOLDMAN – 1961

Society Science Writers Seminar, 1961, St. Peters- burg, Fla. 5. Syverton, J. T.: Immunology and Cancer, ... Editorial, J.A.M.A. 169:1758 (April 11) 1959. ...

Webcast of ACS Science Writers Seminar

Webcast Offers Insight into Reporting of Cancer News

----

Article date: 2000/04/05

An opportunity to gain a better understanding of how medical reporters decide which advances in cancer research should be reported to the public is available beginning this week at www.cancereducation.com.

For the first time in the 42-year history of the American Cancer Society’s (ACS) Science Writers Seminar, the three and a half days of lectures on some of the latest cancer research – unfiltered by the press – may be viewed in their entirety via a special audiovisual presentation on the CancerEducation.com web site.

The seminar brings together some 30 top medical reporters and 30 leading cancer researchers to learn from one another in scientific and social sessions.

"This will be a rare opportunity for the public to hear these cancer research papers delivered on a level that is not quite as complex as they would be at a scientific meeting but with a sophistication geared to reporters who follow the cancer field," said Michael S. Weiss, CEO of CancerEducation.com. "At the same time, the public can see how these beat reporters probe the scientists to see what news is the hottest and how certain they are of their conclusions."

The format of the seminar involves two sessions a day, with four or five panel members giving 10-minute talks. Each talk is followed by 10 minutes of questioning from the reporters. Before each panel, the session chairperson briefs the reporters on the context of the papers they are about to hear.

Viewers can log in at their leisure to catch what is of interest during the 14 hours of sessions, or come back time after time to see the entire seminar. They may also see the full program and read the papers presented by visiting the News Room.

"Observing reporters and scientists communicate with one another should be a real boost for both patients and clinicians in their understanding of how research news is presented and delivered," said Harmon Eyre, MD, chief medical officer of the ACS.

"Our hope is that this unique collaboration with CancerEducation.com will be a valuable tool to help people make truly informed medical decisions."

Viewers will notice that the seminar’s opening panel is on women’s cancer and includes presentations on ovarian, endometrial, cervical and vulvar cancer. The women’s cancer panel is followed by one on colorectal cancer, then one on alternative and complementary therapies – which includes presentations on high-dose vitamin C, acupuncture against chemotherapy-induced nausea, anticancer activity of Japanese maitake mushrooms and the herbal remedy PC-SPES.

Other panels cover cancer genetics, breast cancer and prostate cancer. The breast cancer panel includes presentations on antidepressants used to fight hot flashes and the risk of experiencing fuzzy thinking even a decade after chemotherapy. The prostate cancer panel delves into the provocative question of whether the era of PSA (prostate-specific antigen) testing has led to a reduced death rate from the disease.

"It’s not always so easy to defend one’s research to a room full of skeptical reporters who have heard it all before," said Dr. Marc Lippman, director of the Lombardi Cancer Center at Georgetown University and chairman of CancerEducation.com’s medical advisory board.

First a note: All markings in bold and italic are done by me today.

Basic facts:

SNIPPED BY ME TO PREVENT BOREDOM

I can't help, Mr. Viklund, but your words SMELL...what is your intention here on this forum, what is your profession, where do you come from, are you one of those Judyth Stalkers out of the fishy McAdams Team, operating with her stolen manuscript? Asylum-seeker, provisional asylum, blabla... I don't give a damn, Mr. Viklund. Judyth has a story to tell, don't interrupt her with this uninteresting of topic asylum quibble.

KK

Edited March 10, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Barb Junkkarinen]

There is more to do, some still in process, but after wallowing in that poop for so long I have taken a good long Judyth break ... and have been waiting for her new book to come out before posting more info ...

Bests,

Barb :-)

Careful, Barb. Beware that slope is a slippery one if you start climbing it again. Life is short.

RIP, Rich.

Peter Fokes

LOL Peter. It's more of a long winding road. Very long, no end to the winding part, as you know.<g> The latest revisions

are rather entertaining though. I will be happy to leave it all in the dust sometime soon. New book delayed again, I hear.

Bests,

Barb :-)

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Pat,

Sorry about that. I don't know where it came from, but I have deleted it. At least your post is relevant to this thread.

Jim

Jack,

You, more than anyone else, are convincing me that Judyth has never received a fair shake. So far as I have been able to discern, EVERY POINT YOU HAVE MADE AGAINST HER HAS BEEN WRONG. [i have italicized two lines here where I inferred she was quoting from others. Those are my italics.] Consider the following:

From Judyth:

Look at this, and then see how my testimony has been twisted by prejudice:

I Led Three Lives premiered in 1953. Robert Oswald joined the Marines in 1952. So when I say Pat Speer is having a back and forth with Stalin's New Soviet . . .

Jack White gave you the pitch--and that comes from not talking to me or reading my statements carefully--that through much labor of love I write yet again. See, this is the stuff that has been erased, Jim and Lola---and now I have to go through it all over again!

Anyway, Jack says I fell for Robert Oswald's "lie" and ten made up my own. (By the way, psychologically, all this does sink into your soul, as you read these attacks.) He says Lee Oswald did not see and love "I Led Three Lives" as Robert said, which was his favorite show, because "Robert was in the Marines by 1952, and the show came out in 1953."

Robert said Lee saw it in Texas.

His memory is flawed, that's all. Lee saw it in New York and probably told Robert he watched it and loved it when Robert visited them in Texas on leave. That is my educated guess.

White says I have somehow fallen for the Robert Oswald fabrication.

But, as I told you on the phone BEFORE Jack White brought this up, Lee told me he saw "I Led Three Lives" in New York, which is why he looked to see if it was 'still playing' in New York, when he spotted the TV guide on the back of my article.

I just spent two hours reading this entire thread. Perhaps it was a waste of time...time will tell...

I am curious nonetheless, as to how my name appeared in this thread in association with Stalin... ??? Is this a snippet from some earlier post which I somehow missed reading?

Edited March 10, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Barb Junkkarinen]

If you have been following this thread, many others--who include Jim

Marrs, Wim Dankbaar, and Ed Haslam, for example--who have dealt with Judyth believe in her, as do I.

Listening to Barb about Judyth is a colossal blunder ...

Basing a conclusion on anyone's opinion, would be a colossal blunder. While I am entitled to my opinion, just as you and everyone else are, it is what I can present as evidence and documentation to support that opinion that matters.

I am having extensive dealings

with her and if she is not "the real deal", I will eat my hat (figuratively speaking, since I don't wear one)......

We must all learn the limitations of our competence. In my opinion, the two Dougs, for all their excellence, are still groping for theirs.

Extensive dealings with Judyth and merely posting ... and reposting ... cyber reams of her excuses, explanations and retorts appears to be your basis for your conclusion that she is "the real deal." That is your opinion, to which you are, of course, entitled. But what exactly have you checked out that you can show anyone to support that opinion, have you found documentation on any of the issues of her story (aside from her having worked at Reily and been an outstanding science student)?

I am not trained in logic or critical thinking, Professor, but common sense and scholarship in research dictate, it seems to me, that one does not allow a claimant to self verify their own story, regardless of the volume of words they can put out per day.

And, I will be happy to buy you a hat.

Barb :-)

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

JUDYTH RESPONDS: WHO IS MR. VIKLUND? HOW DID HE LEARN CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION ABOUT ME?

HE WRITES:

'Of course, even though the ONLY ONE COUNTRY that ever looked at these arguments of you being ”hunted” and more, said they did not believe a word of these claims–here's exactly what they wrote:

”Judyth Vary Baker has not shown that any likelihood of her native country lacking the will or the capabilities to protect her, exists.”

REPLY: IT IS A FACT THAT NO AMERICAN CAN 'PROVE' THAT THEIR COUNTRY LACKS THE WILL OR CAPABILITY TO PROTECT ONE OF ITS CITIZENS. SEE WHAT A PERSON WHO RECEIVES A DEATH THREAT, SUCH AS DR. FETZER, HAS TO SAY ABOUT THE CAPABILITY OF HIS COUNTRY TO PROTECT HIM FROM THAT THREAT.

THIS IS THE STANDARD REPLY THEY HAD TO MAKE FOR AN AMERICAN. TO SAY OTHERWISE WOULD BE POLITICALLY INCORRECT, NO MATTER HOW MANY DICK CHENEYS ARE RUNNING THINGS.

End quote. Anyone who takes the time to read the upper court's decision will certainly see that she tried to prove just that. A monumental cascade of reasons is what she presented them with. None, of course, that made any impression on either one of the two courts involved in Judyth's case..."

How did Mr. Viklund learn that I had supplied the court with "a monumental cascade of reasons" unless he had access to my confidential files?

How did he get that quotation?

Here is a misstatement from Mr. Viklund:

”Glenn Viklund [glenn54.vikl...@dataphone.se] wrote:

> One last thing. The document published by Tony is just a request for her

> to come in to the immigration authorities. It's got nothing to do with her

> appeal, or her being granted on appeal.

[REPLY: It was sent only as proof was not an illegal alien and was in the system when the accusations were made by Barb, McAdams, and Co.]

On the contrary, this document is

> what any asylum seeker would receive after having been denied asylum. They want to arrange for her trip back home -

[NOTE from JVB: The document said FOR ME TO COME IN TO DISCUSS WHEN I WAS LEAVING SWEDEN, NOT A RETURN TO THE UNITED STATES.]

...which probably means that they will pay for her trip to wherever she is going when leaving Sweden.

[NOTE from JVB: 'PROBABLY' IS UNTRUE. ONLY you are deported to your home country, do they pay for your trip. They do not pay for your transportation to any other country. I paid my own way out and there was no deportation order involved. I come and go freely back and forth between Sweden and other countries. This would not have been allowed if I had been deported.]

This person got into my private files. How else did he know there was "a monumental cascade of reasons" when every single document and photo I offered was labeled confidential and I was promised that it would be kept confidential forever?

Or Mr. Viklund has amazing powers to read through file cabinets, apparently, with x-ray vision, to see how thick my file was.

He then goes on to say:

'I note that ”provisional asylum” is still today a frequently used description in various forums, even though this term does not exist. ASYLUM SEEKER, folks. It really isn't that hard. Try it, it works and above all – it is the correct description of her status during her stay in Sweden. She provided an ID in this thread with a photo. ”ASYLSÖKANDE”, which is the Swedish word for ASYLUM SEEKER.

[NOTE from JVB: Mr. Viklund is conflating the term 'asylum seeker' --which describes the person--with 'provisional asylum' which describes the situation of the asylum seeker who is waiting for the decision. What does he prefer to call it? Asylum-seeker-waiting-for-final-decision?

I have already posted examples of the term being used on the Internet in 2008 and 2009 and can provide some more for Mr. Viklund.

But it is time for Mr. Viklund to identify himself as more than somebody connected to a cell phone system and tell us how he was able to find out direct quotes from my confidential files that were NOT stated to me, as my personal witnesses can attest. I would not like to think that Mr.. Vicklund was allowed to write down direct quotes from my files.

How did he get them?

What does Mr. Viklund do for a living? I just talked to my friends in Sweden via email and they are shocked that he did such a thing. He is considered a spy by my friends in Sweden. The Swedes are sensitive about both human rights and the right to confidentiality of files regarding those seeking political asylum. They realize somebody's life could be endangered if these files are not kept confidential.

For example, regarding violation of privacy, no photos are allowed to be taken of people using ATMs. Some of their rights have recently eroded.

What a mean thing he says next:

ASYLUM SEEKER, the correct description of her status....is used to define Africans, Arabs and such. Doesn't quite have the same shine to it, now does it, Pamela.

What is this man saying? That the desperate who come to Sweden to save their lives are to be sneered at? 'Africans?' 'Arabs and such'? What kind of man is this Mr. Viklund, if that is his name? This is NOT the way the Swedes I know talk.

NOTE THIS:

(February 2010) ..... Throughout this year, Egyptian police have shot dead 20 African asylum seekers ...

They certainly would have preferred to have been in Sweden...

Viklund also writes:

About the document they provided, where a rather insignificant summon to a meeting is presented as a grant of asylum. The intellectual level of this kind of argumentation is that of a rather naive child.

[JVB: Why more sneers? This was already explained as a simplification..heaven knows it was provided only to prove i was not an ILLEGAL ALIEN, as these people accused me of being...]

....he claims he is a 'lurker' --fine...that very, very rare native Swede, conveniently located in Sweden, that speaks up, after a decade, on McAdams' newsgroup....Go ahead and buy that, people....Even if he DOES show up again when inspired by events on this forum...a Swede, no less! on the newsgroup, though he never posted before, and after a couple posts, never would again.”

[JVB: sorry, bringing up his name meant that he had to surface again...]

Lots of errors here. I contacted McAdams, on my own initiative.

[JVB: Prove it, Mr. Viklund...They constantly reported my whereabouts for years, on a regular basis...]

As I've explained, I've been following the JFK debate for a long time, and found it interesting that JVB was in Sweden. I realised that I could quite easily check some of the things that were furiously debated regarding her asylum process, at that time. And yes - I have made a few posts after dec -08, but I've mainly remained a reader of the forum. Yes - a lurker, if you insist...

”HE REPORTED ON WHAT HE COULD FIND OUT ABOUT MY CASE AND MY PRIVATE FILES. HE EVEN PUBLISHED MY CASE FILE NUMBER ON THE INTERNET, SHOCKING ALL THE SWEDES I KNOW, WHO ARE VERY INTERESTED TO MEET THIS PARAGON OF ETHICAL BEHAVIOR, AN EMBARRASSMENT TO THEM.”

These files are not your private domain at all. They are official records, held at the courts involved and are publicly available to anyone who asks for them.

[JVB: You can't get them online. You have to MAKE A LOT OF PHONE CALLS---EVEN THEN, GOOD LUCK AT GETTING ANYTHING...MY SWEDISH FRIENDS TRIED TO DUPLICATE YOUR FEAT...They say you made a trip there or made a special contact that you should not have made unless you had some morbid interest and persuaded others to cooperate... My own friends tried to duplicate what Mr. Viklund said he accomplished. They are shocked at what he said he was able to do with "telephone calls."... I urge anyone who wishes to try to get the same information about me --a known friend, not a McAdams clone--to try to do so....if they can get confidential information, I can sue for breach of confidentiality.]

You are no exception from the rule, whatsoever. You will need to learn a few things about the Swedish principle of public access to records. It is part of our constitution and cannot be fiddled with.

[Public access to decision records does not include public access to confidential information given by a political asylum applicant...see below....not descriptions of my files....]

BUT FIRST, FINISHING WHAT HE WROTE:

Question: Since I came from Hungary, a Schengen country. WHY WASN'T IMMEDIATELY DEPORTED BACK TO HUNGARY, TO HAVE THEM HANDLE MY REQUEST, SAVING SWEDEN A LOT OF MONEY AND INVESTIGATION TIME?

Not so, most likely this was because your time in Hungary had ran out. In which case you – and everyone else – coming from any other Schengen country would have to be considered for the asylum process in Sweden. But lets give you the benefit of doubt here: what kind of permit did you have during your stay in Hungary?

[JVB: My time in Hungary had not run out. So why was I not sent back THERE? My passport shows I had only been there 2 months when forced to leave due to threats. You can stay 90 days without a work permit, as in all EU countries.... But I was working as a teacher, which included getting our work permits in Bratislava, Slovakia before it became Schengen. NOTHING 'ran out.' ]

As you seem to have copies of mostly everything, just Xerox it and publish it in this thread. Should be a quick thing.

[JVB: FIRST, let's get Xeroxes about who YOU really are, Mr. Viklund. My Swedish friends are anxious to find you. They want to meet you. They wish to discuss with you your violation of my privacy rights...They are shocked and horrified at what you have disclosed, showing you managed to get into confidential records. They were also shocked at what you said about Africans and Arabs. They think you are Swedish, but they also think you're a spy.]

NOTE THIS STATEMENT:

Well, the process of Political Asylum is about protection from something. Nothing particular about your claim here. The definition of political asylum is that you are on the run. That's what you claimed – from a whole lot of things by the way, when reading your lengthy story sometimes unclear exactly from whom or what - and that's what they considered during the process.

[JVB: Just how does Mr. Viklund know what elements of my testimony they considered?

He also writes:

”MY SWEDISH FRIENDS WERE VERY UPSET, BECAUSE MY FILE NUMBER WAS NOT EASY TO GET. THEY COULD NOT GET IT. ”

Well, too bad. It shouldn't take anyone more than a few phone calls.

”I WAS TOLD MY FILE NUMBER WOULD 'ALWAYS' REMAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND THAT ANYTHING I PUT IN THAT FILE WOULD REMAIN CONFIDENTIAL, FOREVER”

Highly unlikely that anyone told you this. The process is the same for all, and your case was in every respect treated according to standard practice. I don't believe a word of this. What was the officials name? The probability of your case being exempt from our constitutional laws are so miniscule that it is neglectable.

==Note here how hard it is to get a 'positive' on appeal==

A. IT IS OUR POLICY NOT TO COMMENT ON INDIVIDUAL ASYLUM REQUESTS IN ORDER TO PROTECT

THE INTEGRITY AND CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE ASYLUM PROCESS.

An analysis carried out by the three Swedish migration courts, in Stockholm, Gothenburg and Malmö, shows that the proportion of asylum appeals that are rejected differs greatly between the courts. During the last quarter of 2006, 38% of asylum appeals were sustained in Gothenburg, while only 20% in Stockholm and 27% in Malmö respectively. Possible explanations for the difference in verdicts include differences in the process regarding the number of judges determining cases and whether asylum-seekers get to speak in court or not, as well as variation in the asylum cases including the age of the case and origin of asylum-seekers. The migration courts, which have started a database where they will be able to compare each other’s verdicts, point out that there are a few guiding verdicts by the Migration Court of Appeal.

(Dagens Nyheter 1 June 2007 http://www.dn.se/DNet/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=147&a=656477)

First a note: All markings in bold and italic are done by me today.

Basic facts:

SNIPPED BY ME TO PREVENT BOREDOM

I can't help, Mr. Viklund, but your words SMELL...what is your intention here on this forum, what is your profession, where do you come from, are you one of those Judyth Stalkers out of the fishy McAdams Team, operating with her stolen manuscript? Asylum-seeker, provisional asylum, blabla... I don't give a damn, Mr. Viklund. Judyth has a story to tell, don't interrupt her with this uninteresting of topic asylum quibble.

KK

[Dean Hagerman]

Jim

I have not gotten an email reply or a reply in this thread of my question that I asked Judyth

Did she get the question that you forwarded to her?

Thanks

Dean

[Guest John Gillespie]

YouTube: Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

http://www.youtube.com/user/JamesFetzerNews

Judyth Vary Baker, with whom I and others within the JFK community are in contact, lives in exile due to persecution in the US because of what she knows as a witness concerning Lee Harvey Oswald. The covert operation against Judyth is very serious and takes its toll upon her. She is now 66 years of age and has been forced to live in exile in Europe, where she resides in virtual poverty, even though she is a talented artist who has sold her paintings around the world for more than thirty years. The objective of this campaign appears to be to minimize awareness of her existence as a link to the alleged assassin.

My Blog: Judyth Vary Baken: Living in Exile

http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2010...-in-exile.html

_______________________________________________________________________________-

Professor Fetzer,

I wrote to Judyth several years ago through this forum about something that ought to strike any number of folks as very significant. There was an interview in a Dutch magazine with Judyth in which she told the interviewer that when she met LHO he spoke first and in Russian. Then, I saw shortly thereafter that McAdams (if you'll pardon the expression) has it the other way around: that Judyth says she spoke first and in Russian.

I don't believe McAdams and do believe what I read after translating the Dutch interview on Babelfish. But either way this is major and more than a bit curious why this has not come under a harsher light. Now, if no one gets why any of this is significant, so be it (duh). But, if you or someone else could get her to retell that tale without prompting her, terrific. She didn't respond to my email. Thanks.

As Always,

JG

Edited March 11, 2010 by John Gillespie

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Dean,

Yes, I have an answer for you. Send me an email and I'll track it down.

Jim

Jim

I have not gotten an email reply or a reply in this thread of my question that I asked Judyth

Did she get the question that you forwarded to her?

Thanks

Dean

[Barb Junkkarinen]

Professor Fetzer,

I wrote to Judyth several years ago through this forum about something that ought to strike any number of folks as very significant. There was an interview in a Dutch magazine with Judyth in which she told the interviewer that when she met LHO he spoke first and in Russian. Then, I saw shortly thereafter that McAdams (if you'll pardon the expression) has it the other way around: that Judyth says she spoke first and in Russian.

I don't believe McAdams and do believe what I read after translating the Dutch interview on Babelfish. But either way this is major and more than a bit curious why this has not come under a harsher light. Now, if no one gets why any of this is significant, so be it (duh). But, if you or someone else could get her to retell that tale without prompting her, terrific. She didn't respond to my email. Thanks.

As Always,

JG

Hi John,

Here is an excerpt from a post Judyth posted herself in 2001. It is a very long response to comments made by Mary Ferrell; salient excerpt only here, the entire message can be found at: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassi...sassination.jfk

NOTE: Mary Ferrell's words are indicated by the ">" ... Judyth's comments are easy to recognize, as she sets them off in ======== at the beginning and end of each comment.

Judyth V. Baker View profile

More options Dec 30 2001, 11:51 am

Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk

From: electlad...@aol.com (Judyth V. Baker)

Date: 30 Dec 2001 14:51:16 -0500

Local: Sun, Dec 30 2001 11:51 am

Subject: Re: Mary Ferrell on Judyth

[......]

>She [Judyth-bj] was so startled that she dropped a rolled-up newspaper

> that was under her arm and Lee Oswald stooped and retrieved it. When

> he handed it to her, she thanked him in Russian.

=====ERROR. i have plainly repeated what happened her to many readers.

As i was HANDED the letter, i dropped the rolled-up paper that had a

coded message printed in it: "JARYO...nice here..." etc. It was kissed

with lipstick and LHO noticed it, he later told me. I WAS NEVER

STARTLED BY ANYTHING. He picked it up and handed it to me and I said

thanks, comrade, In Russian, Today, I say "TUSEN TAK" in Norwegian. It

was a habit i had and have always kept, ask any of my friends, to say

'thank you' in various foreign languages. ======

On page 53/54, Volume I of her published book, Judyth wrote:

I put the stamp on the letter automatically, and handed it to the postman. As I did so, I lost my underarm grip on the newspaper, and the newspaper -- with the envelope that had the ad on it -- fell to the floor. The young man picked up the newspaper, and, after glancing at the circled and red-marked ad, and the envelope, he handed it back to me. I took it, and gave him my prettiest smile.

I had a habit of saying a few common phrases. such as thank you, goodbye, or hello, in Russian, wanting to keep up my slight abilities in the language. With almost nobody to speak Russian to, this was my strategy. I had worked too hard to allow all my Russian to slip away.

"Karashaw, Tovarietsch," I said, in my atrocious Russian.

I was also sort of flirting with this young man, miffed that there was nothing at all for me from Robert (he wasn't 'Bobby' to me now!) But instead of puzzling/inyeresting the young stranger with my Russian phrase, as I'd hoped, I received a shock. For he leaned close to me and said, in perfect Russian, "It's not good to speak Russian in New Orleans."

NOTE: The tranlaltor I posted before does not work on her text, because romanized words are often spelled in different ways.

Хорошо (harushow, or karusho are pretty close) means "good" ...

Спасибо (Spasiba) is "thank you."

Saying, "Good, comrade" could be used loosely as "thank you, comrade" but is not the direct translation/meaning of the word she used.

Товари (tovarishch) does translate as "comrade" ... her romanized spelling is just different, but pretty close.

Bests,

Barb :-)