Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[Jack White]

JVB does say some things that SEEM TO BE TRUE.

1. She apparently was employed at Reily Coffee as an office worker at the same time as LHO

was employed as a "machinery oiler".

2. She apparently was acquainted with a person known to her as "Lee". (this despite

Armstrong's proof that this person preferred to be called "Harvey".)

3. She gives addresses of places where she resided during the period involved. I have no

reason to doubt that she lived at those addresses.

4. She documents a police raid (?) on one of those places and that other residents were

taken into custody but she was not. This is an odd event, but I have no reason to doubt

that such a raid took place.

5. She documents that as a high school student she excelled in science. There is no reason

to doubt that she was a bright science student.

6. Though she offers no documentation nor details, she says that because of her scientific

aptitude as a high school student, the CIA or military recruited her as a teen-ager to work

on some unspecified project, and sent her to New Orleans where the work was to be done.

However, for unknown reasons, the project was delayed, and she was put into a "holding

pattern" job at Reily Coffee awaiting the scientific project. I do not disbelieve this, because

there was evidence that Reily Coffee was a front for other covert activities. I can accept

this as REASONABLE, though there is no proof offered that it is true, and she offers no

details of her recruitment, what her parents thought, what her fiance thought, etc. A teen

girl going alone to live in New Orleans without prospects of employment or a place to live

is somewhat peculiar.

7. She says (there is no reason to doubt this), that in the midst of her romance with Lee,

her fiance Mr. Baker came to New Orleans and demanded that they get married immediately,

and that they eloped to Mobile, Alabama. Then, after one day of marriage, she says her

new husband deserted her, taking an offshore job in the Gulf, and he was gone all summer.

Though this is a very peculiar claim, I presume that she can back this up with marriage

records. She does not adequately explain how this peculiar event came about.

This is the extent of JVB claims that are PROVED to a reasonable extent. All other claims

are based on JVB personal statements which have yet to be proved true.

Jack

There are lots of things you can't imagine, Jack, but that does not mean that they are not true.

I don't know how the phone connection was made, but that would not surprise me in the least.

What will impress me is the first time that you grant that something Judyth has to say is true.

Thanks for the laundromat information. I had never seen that. As I recall from the DellaRosa forum,

some researcher had researched a possible laundromat and could find none. I cannot remember

the name of the researcher who said there was no laundromat.

I recall that years later when I finally checked out Beckley Street in person, there was a gas station

across from the 1026 rooming house...and no signs of a washateria; the rest was residential.

Perhaps the laundromat was converted later to a gas station. I remember looking on both

Beckley and Zang for a washateria, and could find none...but that was many years later, so it

could have closed.

I also noted that your info said the washateria closed at midnight. As I recall JVB's claim, it was

said to be a 24-hour place, and that the phone calls were often after midnight.

Also, the claim is that somehow a mafia phone line was patched into the pay phone. I cannot

imagine this happening without the knowledge of Southwestern Bell.

Thanks.

Jack

JUDYTH RESPONDS TO JACK WHITE:

.........

==ON TMWKK THE LOVE AFFAIR AND EVER SINCE 1999 WHEN I FIRST SPOKE OUT, I MENTIONED 14-15 PHONE CALLS BETWEEN OCTOBER 6 AND EARLY AM NOV. 21.==

He would go across Beckley Street from his rooming house to a 24-hour laundromat and call her on a pay phone there, and they would talk for hours. This was countered on several counts, as I recall.

==IT HAS NEVER BEEN COUNTERED. A JANITOR IS IN THE MARY FERRELL CHRONOLOGY REPORTING SEEING LEE OSWALD THERE THE LAST NIGHT HE CALLED ME. I DID NOT SAY THAT LEE USED THE LAUNDROMAT EVERY TIME FOR A CALL. I DESCRIBED BEING ABLE TO HEAR CARS PASSING BY ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS...NOR DID I CLAIM A PAYPHONE EXISTED INSIDE THE LAUNDROMAT. I HAVE SOME INFORMATION ABOUT HIS, THOUGH, THAT THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY SHOULD KNOW ABOUT. IT CASTS ASPERSIONS ON THE ROLE AND CONDUCT OF RUTH PAINE ON THE EVENING OF NOV. 21==

Some researcher found no such nearby laundromat existed.

==INACCURATE. THE JANITOR'S LAUNDROMAT REPORT WAS FROM THE FBI.==

Ian Griggs wrote an article called "Kill That Myth!" that appeared in Fair Play Magazine, Fair Play Issue #25, Nov-Dec 1998; it included this information:

CE 3000 is an FBI report of an interview with Leslie Lawson, the owner and manager of Gray's Cleaners, 1209 Eldorado, Oak Cliff on 5th December 1963. Although not stated in the interview notes, that location is only a hundred yards from Oswald's rooming house. Lawson stated that 'he has seen Lee Harvey Oswald on one particular occasion that he can recall and possibly on other occasions which he could not specifically recall.' Mr Lawson then said that approximately a month earlier, Lee Harvey Oswald had entered his cleaning establishment and handed in a tie, white shirt and black pair of trousers for cleaning. Two days later, when Oswald called to collect these items, he had been charged $1.25 and had complained about being charged 25 cents for the cleaning of his tie.

Lawson also stated that he had seen Oswald on several occasions at Sleight's Speed Wash, 1101 North Beckley. This establishment had, in fact, changed its name to Reno's Speed Wash in August 1963. A former Reno's employee, Joseph Johnson, was interviewed by the FBI on 28th July 1964 and stated that on the evening of 20th or 21st November 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald was 'washing laundry at Reno's Speed Wash.' Oswald, he said, remained there, reading magazines, until midnight. (CE 3001)

CE3000 can be seen here:

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol26_0275b.htm

CE3001 can be seen here:

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol26_0276b.htm

CE3001 does not include the interview of Joe Johnson, but in it, the owner of the laundromat names him as an employee of the laundromat at the time.

CE3009 is the one that actually contains info about the interview with Johnson. It can be seen here:

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol26_0285a.htm

Johnson, the janitor, worked from 7pm til midnight and reported Oswald was there doing laundry on either the night of the 20th or 21st of November ... he says Oswald did not converse with anyone and sat reading magazines until midnight, when "the merchant patrolman" asked Oswald to leave as the laundromat was closing.

The laundromat, being at 1101 N. Beckley, would, of course, be in the next block and on the other side of the street from O's rooming house at 1026 N. Beckley.

Bests,

Barb :-)

[Jack White]

For those who have not read Armstrong and who do not believe that there were two Marguerites:

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

JUDYTH REPLIES TO JACK (IN PART):

ABOUT THOSE LATE NIGHT PHONE CALLS:

I also noted that your info said the washateria closed at midnight. As I recall JVB's claim, it was

said to be a 24-hour place, and that the phone calls were often after midnight.

==I NEVER SAID ANY SUCH THING. I SAID PEOPLE WERE REPORTING THAT LEE NEVER LEFT HIS BOARDING HOUSE ROOM. I ALSO HAVE PLENTY TO SAY ABOUT THE LAUNDRY. THAT WAS AN EXCUSE TO BE 'OUT'==

WHY? LEE WAS A CAREFUL MAN WITH MONEY. RUTH PAINE TESTIFIED THAT SHE WASHED LEE OSWALD'S CLOTHES. SHE MENTIONS THEY FOLDED CLOTHES THE NIGHT OF THE 21ST -- OSWALD FAMILY STUFF AND HER OWN, WE ASSUME, AS SHE MENTIONS MARINA FOLDING CLOTHES, AND THERE WERE OF COURSE FABRIC DIAPERS.

I HAVE MORE TO SAY, BUT WHY IS LEE OSWALD OUT A MIDNIGHT DOING LAUNDRY WHEN HE CAN GET IT DONE FREE AT PAINES? WHY IS HE OUT A MIDNIGHT INSTEAD OF AT 7 OR 8 OR 9? HE HAS TO LEAVE FOR WORK AT ABOUT 7:30, HAS TO CROSS THAT LONG BRIDGE, TO GET TO WORK -- HAS TO CATCH A BUS TO GE THERE -- HAS TO EAT BREAKFAST BEFORE THAT...PACK HIS LUNCH -- HE ALWAYS PACKED A LUNCH -- SO WHY IS HE OUT SO LATE?

I SAID WE TALKED THE NIGHT OF THE 20TH TO EARLY THE 21ST BY PHONE

FROM ABOUT 11:30 OR SO TO ABOUT 1:00, MAYBE A LITTLE LONGER, LEE'S TIME. THIS IS NOT THAT FAR FROM THE TIME FRAME REPORTED BY THE JANITOR. IF THE PLACE CLOSED AT MIDNIGHT AND HE WAS ASKED TO LEAVE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HALF AN HOUR IF THE PAYPHONE WAS LOCATED OUTSIDE. I COULD HEAR CARS PASSING AND THOUGHT HE WAS CALLING MAYBE FROM NEAR A CONVENIENCE STORE. AS FOR ME, I HAD NO WATCH,BUT LEFT OUR APARTMENT AND WENT TO A SEVEN-ELEVEN A FEW BLOCKS AWAY AND WAITED...IN A PHONE BOOTH.

I DIDN'T THINK MY ESTIMATE COULD BE OFF BY SO MUCH AS HALF AN HOUR, BUT IT COULD.

MY HUSBAND WAS STUDYING FOR HIS GRE [Graduate Record Exam] AND AN ENGLISH EXAM AT THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY. THE LIBRARY WAS OPEN EXTRA HOURS DURING EXAM TIMES, ON TRIMESTER SYSTEM. IT WAS OPEN UNTIL 3 AM AND I WAS HOME ABOUT AN HOUR OR SO, IN BED BUT UNABLE TO SLEEP.

AS FOR THE MAFIA BETTING LINE, WE HAVE NEWSPAPER ARTICLES ABOUT A MASSIVE BETTING RING BEING UNCOVERED...

HERE WAS ONE IN 1957, SOON AFTER THE APPALACHIA MAFIA ROUNDUP::

"About two weeks after that raid, federal agents broke up a Terre Haute, Ind., gambling operation that handled as much as $10 million in bets during a 10-week period. A federal grand jury was convened to investigate the gambling operation. More than 170 people nationwide were subpoenaed, and Ryan was one of them. The investigation uncovered a nationwide telephone betting system that had wagers on everything from college and professional football to the World Series. Bets on single games were as high as $10,000."

http://www.haciendahotsprings.com/RayRyan.htm

THIS 1964 BOOK--MENTIONS MAFIA BETTING LINES...

Organized Crime / U.S.

...There's an entire chain of mini-conspiracies, ... It's about Mafia influence in U.S. business: trucking, garbage, the meat industry, ...This book also offers an introduction to the world of betting lines, odds makers and ...

Montreal: Pocket Books, 1964. 241 pages.

WE HAD ACCESS TO A MAFIA HORSE RACE BETTING LINE WITH SOME SPECIAL PHONE NUMBERS. AS ONE RESEARCHER WHO INVESTIGATED ME (AND THEN BECAME A SUPPORTER) OBSERVED, AFTER TRACING THE PHONE LINE ROUTES, IN NEWSPAPER ARTICLES FROM 1964-1965, "MAYBE THE FBI DIDN'T HEAR THEM TALKING, BUT THE MAFIA COULD." THAT WAS SOMETHING WE'D NEVER CONSIDERED...SO I GUESS MONK IS RIGHT ABOUT 'WISDOM' AFTER ALL....

JVB

Thanks for the laundromat information. I had never seen that. As I recall from the DellaRosa forum,

some researcher had researched a possible laundromat and could find none. I cannot remember

the name of the researcher who said there was no laundromat.

I recall that years later when I finally checked out Beckley Street in person, there was a gas station

across from the 1026 rooming house...and no signs of a washateria; the rest was residential.

Perhaps the laundromat was converted later to a gas station. I remember looking on both

Beckley and Zang for a washateria, and could find none...but that was many years later, so it

could have closed.

I also noted that your info said the washateria closed at midnight. As I recall JVB's claim, it was

said to be a 24-hour place, and that the phone calls were often after midnight.

Also, the claim is that somehow a mafia phone line was patched into the pay phone. I cannot

imagine this happening without the knowledge of Southwestern Bell.

Thanks.

Jack

JUDYTH RESPONDS TO JACK WHITE:

.........

==ON TMWKK THE LOVE AFFAIR AND EVER SINCE 1999 WHEN I FIRST SPOKE OUT, I MENTIONED 14-15 PHONE CALLS BETWEEN OCTOBER 6 AND EARLY AM NOV. 21.==

He would go across Beckley Street from his rooming house to a 24-hour laundromat and call her on a pay phone there, and they would talk for hours. This was countered on several counts, as I recall.

==IT HAS NEVER BEEN COUNTERED. A JANITOR IS IN THE MARY FERRELL CHRONOLOGY REPORTING SEEING LEE OSWALD THERE THE LAST NIGHT HE CALLED ME. I DID NOT SAY THAT LEE USED THE LAUNDROMAT EVERY TIME FOR A CALL. I DESCRIBED BEING ABLE TO HEAR CARS PASSING BY ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS...NOR DID I CLAIM A PAYPHONE EXISTED INSIDE THE LAUNDROMAT. I HAVE SOME INFORMATION ABOUT HIS, THOUGH, THAT THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY SHOULD KNOW ABOUT. IT CASTS ASPERSIONS ON THE ROLE AND CONDUCT OF RUTH PAINE ON THE EVENING OF NOV. 21==

Some researcher found no such nearby laundromat existed.

==INACCURATE. THE JANITOR'S LAUNDROMAT REPORT WAS FROM THE FBI.==

Ian Griggs wrote an article called "Kill That Myth!" that appeared in Fair Play Magazine, Fair Play Issue #25, Nov-Dec 1998; it included this information:

CE 3000 is an FBI report of an interview with Leslie Lawson, the owner and manager of Gray's Cleaners, 1209 Eldorado, Oak Cliff on 5th December 1963. Although not stated in the interview notes, that location is only a hundred yards from Oswald's rooming house. Lawson stated that 'he has seen Lee Harvey Oswald on one particular occasion that he can recall and possibly on other occasions which he could not specifically recall.' Mr Lawson then said that approximately a month earlier, Lee Harvey Oswald had entered his cleaning establishment and handed in a tie, white shirt and black pair of trousers for cleaning. Two days later, when Oswald called to collect these items, he had been charged $1.25 and had complained about being charged 25 cents for the cleaning of his tie.

Lawson also stated that he had seen Oswald on several occasions at Sleight's Speed Wash, 1101 North Beckley. This establishment had, in fact, changed its name to Reno's Speed Wash in August 1963. A former Reno's employee, Joseph Johnson, was interviewed by the FBI on 28th July 1964 and stated that on the evening of 20th or 21st November 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald was 'washing laundry at Reno's Speed Wash.' Oswald, he said, remained there, reading magazines, until midnight. (CE 3001)

CE3000 can be seen here:

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol26_0275b.htm

CE3001 can be seen here:

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol26_0276b.htm

CE3001 does not include the interview of Joe Johnson, but in it, the owner of the laundromat names him as an employee of the laundromat at the time.

CE3009 is the one that actually contains info about the interview with Johnson. It can be seen here:

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol26_0285a.htm

Johnson, the janitor, worked from 7pm til midnight and reported Oswald was there doing laundry on either the night of the 20th or 21st of November ... he says Oswald did not converse with anyone and sat reading magazines until midnight, when "the merchant patrolman" asked Oswald to leave as the laundromat was closing.

The laundromat, being at 1101 N. Beckley, would, of course, be in the next block and on the other side of the street from O's rooming house at 1026 N. Beckley.

Bests,

Barb :-)

Edited March 25, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Kathleen Collins]

I don't dislike Judyth. But what she has said in the past makes me wonder. For example, the Mormons turned against her and followed her after she escaped Utah. Secondly, she was called over to Egypt to translate papyrus. I wish Judyth would explain these stories. The first story mentioned is a warning to stay away from organized religion, but I would still like the details. And the latter story makes me wonder how and where she learned to read papyrus. I know she is intellectually brilliant, but where did she get the knowledge of papyrus, and was she so good at it that someone in Egypt sent for her? Does she claim to have an anthropology degree? I would like these questions answered. But I won't hold my breath. I'm sorry Judyth is beset by health and financial problems. And I wish her well. I just wish she would explain the Mormons and the papyrus.

Kathy C

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Kathy,

Yes, Judyth had a degree in physical anthropology, one among many disciplines she has studied. This in combination with her medical knowledge has enhanced her ability to deal with photographs of persons at different stages of their lives. If you reread some of those posts, then you will notice that that is the case.

Jim

JUDYTH REPLIES TO KATHY COLLINS:

I DID NOT SAY THESE THINGS. COMMENTS BELOW:

I don't dislike Judyth.

==THAT'S NICE TO KNOW==

But what she has said in the past makes me wonder.

==MAKE SURE I SAID IT AND IT IS NOT A SECONDHAND QUOTE==

For example, the Mormons turned against her and followed her after she escaped Utah.

1) NEVER LIVED IN UTAH. AN INCIDENT OCCURRED IN NORWAY WHEN MORMONS TRIED TO STOP ME FROM LEAVING NORWAY AND MY CHRISTIAN FRIENDS -- 18 OF THEM -- BLOCKED THEM.. I HAD LEFT THE MORMON CHURCH OVER EGYPTIAN PAPYRUS TRANSLATION ISSUES.

Secondly, she was called over to Egypt to translate papyrus.

==NEVER HAPPENED==

BUT I'VE EXCAVATED A DIGS IN ISRAEL, JORDAN,NORWAY,GREECE AND OTHER PLACES . I RAN SOME DIGS MYSELF IN LOUISIANA FOR MY UNIVERSITY'S CONTINUING EDUCATION PROGRAM==

I wish Judyth would explain these stories. The first story mentioned is a warning to stay away from organized religion, but I would still like the details.

==I AM A 'RELUCTANT CHRISTIAN' WHO BELIEVES IN CHRIST AS MY SAVIOR, BUT IT TOOK A LOT TO GET TO THAT POINT. I DISLIKE RELIGIOUS CHARLATANS SUCH AS ARE ON TV==

And the latter story makes me wonder how and where she learned to read papyrus.

==THERE ARE SOME 10,000 OF US, LAST I LOOKED.. THIRTEEN LONG YEARS OF STUDY. SOME DOCUMENTATION IN MY HONORS THESIS FROM U OF HOUSTON, RE MURALISIMO AND A STUDY OF HIEROGLYPHS FROM EGYPTIAN AND AZTEC SOURCES.==

I know she is intellectually brilliant, but where did she get the knowledge of papyrus, and was she so good at it that someone in Egypt sent for her?

==OF COURSE NOT. I WENT TO EGYPT TO HELP IN AN EXCAVATION. I HAD TO APPLY FOR THE DIG LIKE ANYBODY ELSE AND WAS NOT SPONSORED BY AN INSTITUTION.==

Does she claim to have an anthropology degree?

==YES. B.S. 1986, UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON. PLUS GRADUATE HOURS.==

I would like these questions answered. But I won't hold my breath.

== ???? ==

I'm sorry Judyth is beset by health and financial problems. And I wish her well. I just wish she would explain the Mormons and the papyrus.

--I HOPE THIS LAYS IT TO REST FOR YOU.--

JVB

I don't dislike Judyth. But what she has said in the past makes me wonder. For example, the Mormons turned against her and followed her after she escaped Utah. Secondly, she was called over to Egypt to translate papyrus. I wish Judyth would explain these stories. The first story mentioned is a warning to stay away from organized religion, but I would still like the details. And the latter story makes me wonder how and where she learned to read papyrus. I know she is intellectually brilliant, but where did she get the knowledge of papyrus, and was she so good at it that someone in Egypt sent for her? Does she claim to have an anthropology degree? I would like these questions answered. But I won't hold my breath. I'm sorry Judyth is beset by health and financial problems. And I wish her well. I just wish she would explain the Mormons and the papyrus.

Kathy C

Edited March 25, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Judyth comments on Jack's photograph:

We cannot see how ‘slender’ marguerite actually is in the ‘tall, slender’ photo because

that feature is obscured by the skirts and arms of women on both sides…Look closely

and you will see that the skirt’s actual width is obscured. It is more of an optical

illusion than a verified fact about how ‘slender’ marguerite is in the photo to the right.

Also, in the photo shown for comparison, we have already discussed the creation

of a potbelly due to thyroid disorder syndrome.

Inquires about Armstrong's methodology:

A question Judyth has raised but not sent specifically for posting concerns Armstrong's

methodology. Is it the case, Jack, that Armstrong accepts all the records and photographs

he collected as being true? Because Judyth has noticed some points about Lee in New York,

which, in her opinion, John did not understand. If he ran across a student's report that she

(Judyth) had pee'd in her pants, for example, would he have known that it was actually

mouse urine or taken it at face value?

I have raised this question before but not heard an answer. Since the greater the number of

documents and photographs he collected, the greater the probability that some of them are

forgeries or fakes, what principle or methods did he employ to sort out the authentic from

the inauthentic? As you know from our research together, this case is littered with phony

photos, reports, documents and films. Was it his belief that everything he accumulated

was free from all fault and genuine?

For those who have not read Armstrong and who do not believe that there were two Marguerites:

Edited March 25, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Judyth comments on Jack's photograph:

We cannot see how ‘slender’ marguerite actually is in the ‘tall, slender’ photo because

that feature is obscured by the skirts and arms of women on both sides…Look closely

and you will see that the skirt’s actual width is obscured. It is more of an optical

illusion than a verified fact about how ‘slender’ marguerite is in the photo to the right.

Also, in the photo shown for comparison, we have already discussed the creation

of a potbelly due to thyroid disorder syndrome.

Inquires about Armstrong's methodology:

A question Judyth has raised but not sent specifically for posting concerns Armstrong's

methodology. Is it the case, Jack, that Armstrong accepts all the records and photographs

he collected as being true? Because Judyth has noticed some points about Lee in New York,

which, in her opinion, John did not understand. If he ran across a student's report that she

(Judyth) had pee'd in her pants, for example, would he have known that it was actually

mouse urine or taken it at face value?

I have raised this question before but not heard an answer. Since the greater the number of

documents and photographs he collected, the greater the probability that some of them are

forgeries or fakes, what principle or methods did he employ to sort out the authentic from

the inauthentic? As you know from our research together, this case is littered with phony

photos, reports, documents and films. Was it his belief that everything he accumulated

was free from all fault and genuine?

For those who have not read Armstrong and who do not believe that there were two Marguerites:

Edited March 25, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Greg Burnham]

You're welcome, Judyth--and thank you for your reply.

GO_SECURE

monk

JUDYTH RESPONDS TO GREG BURNHAM

[NOTE: He may have been told that he had succeeded in breaking the plot and that nothing

was going to happen that day. We act on our beliefs and that may be what he believed. He

had done his job, he had been successful, so he might as well relax and have a coke.]

Dear Greg-- Thanks for your response. Your comments are sensible and reasonable.

Here are my replies...

Strawman. I was not judging his intelligence. I have no problem accepting his brightness.

===I didn't realize that from what you first wrote. I confess to reading things rather literally.===

I do have a problem accepting that he was that bright, but failed to tell anyone who could have made a difference that Kennedy was to be killed if he REALLY knew it AND TOLD YOU.

===Glad we're talking, Monk. I appreciate the opportunity. Lee told me that he actively worked to save JFK and was instrumental a one point in doing so. He mentioned working through contacts. I now realize this must have occurred in Chicago, as reported by Abraham Bolden, that an informant named "Lee" (not that many "Lee's" around up north, Greg -- It's a southern name -- Robert E. Lee inspired it in the South...

A person intervened via FBI contacts and saved Kennedy there, just barely in time. Because he was a member of an abort team, as I told Jim Marrs over a decade ago, he was following their plan, or should I say, he thought he was. I do not know details of hat plan, but he was not free to risk other lives. Whether they lied about an 'abort team' I do not know, as I haven't seen any references to such on the internet or anywhere else....===

I have a problem believing that someone that damn smart EVEN WENT TO WORK that day knowing what you claim he knew! I would understand if he knew it--and stayed HOME! I might not like that--he should have tried to stop it--but I would BELIEVE human weakness got the best of him and he just called in sick.

===I was sneered at on the McAdams newsgroup for reporting that I begged Lee to take a laxative or something to make himself sick! David Lifton called it the "ExLax Plot" and dismissed my efforts to keep Lee out of it with raucous mockery. Lee said that if he ran, they would kill him, and they would just move somebody else in his place who would enjoy pulling a trigger. As he said, "If I stay, that's one less bullet aimed at Kennedy."

By then, Lee believed he was a dead man whatever he did, so perhaps he stayed locatable so nobody would take his place. I wondered if there might have been another gunman on the 6th floor, who would be there to see if he would shoot or not? Didn't they see more than one person up there in the window? Or are those photos I've seen on Youtube not worth consideration?===

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, MONK.

JVB

(cont.)

JUDYTH:

5) His mother stated he taught himself to read before he started school.

That's a different kind of "bright" and you know it. I'm talking about LIFE EXPERIENCE brightness, which is not the same as maturity, nor is it the same as "gifted" which he may have been. Life experience brightness can be gleaned in one way only, by definition.

6) You can't judge his intelligence by letters he was asked to write. They were not meant to reflect a brilliance that might have made him look suspicious to the communist party, etc.

Strawman. I was not judging his intelligence. I have no problem accepting his brightness. I do have a problem accepting that he was that bright, but failed to tell anyone who could have made a difference that Kennedy was to be killed if he REALLY knew it AND TOLD YOU. I have a problem believing that someone that damn smart EVEN WENT TO WORK that day knowing what you claim he knew! I would understand if he knew it--and stayed HOME! I might not like that--he should have tried to stop it--but I would BELIEVE human weakness got the best of him and he just called in sick.

So much 'bad' has been written about Lee that it has pretty well sifted down to everybody who did not know him.

Don't worry, I don't believe everything I read.

I presented a paper to the Popular Culture Association some years back -- after which my university forbade me to go to any more conventions or publish any more papers. I was 'punished' for writing it. But I intend to present a distillation of it to those forums which would allow it. Along with Lee's facility for Russian, his selection of books, when properly explained, bespeaks of an inquiring and intelligent mind.

No comment.

Why is this important to know? Because Oswald knew more than you think about what was going on. The problem was, he didn't find out in time to be able to get out of it. It is healthy to debate these things without rancour. I also have to say that there were a lot of things we did not know. No doubt of that. Hindsight is so nice!

JVB

Agreed. No rancour.

GO_SECURE

monk

[Greg Burnham]

Jack:

I had posted this years ago on Rich's forum. I will have to look for where I got Oswald's info. I got Kennedy's info from the book "A Question of Character" by Richard Reeves. Kennedy's IQ was 119 and Oswald's was 118. It is easy for me to remember because I simply take Sarah Palin's IQ and double it.

Best,

Doug

Hmmm...

[Don Jeffries]

Jim,

I didn't mean to criticize the way this thread has been handled. I didn't realize JVB was a member, and also was unaware that it is physically that difficult for her to post. Sorry for any confusion.

Judith, I'm interested in exactly what LHO told you about the impending assassination. Of particular interest to me is the comment about him perhaps firing a warning shot. This would indicate he was going to be carrying a gun (or have access to one) that day. Did he tell you that he was bringing a rifle to the TSBD? I apologize if this has been gone over before, and you've previously addressed this subject. Thanks.

[Greg Parker]

The only source of which I am aware for the information that Lee Harvey Oswald was dyslexic is Judyth Vary Baker.]

Sorry, Professor Fetzer. Norman Mailer wrote about Oswald's dyslexia in his book Oswald's Tale, published in 1995.

And I did respond to Judyth.

Kathy C

Mary Ferrell told me that LHO was dyslexic in 1975. I had to ask what the word meant,

and she explained. Mary discovered it by having read every writing attributed to him.

It is reported in many books.

Jack

This is my one and only entry into this quagmire.

Oswald was never diagnosed as dyslexic. I'd say there was good reason for this: he wasn't. It is primarily a READING disability. Any spelling problems are secondary to that - if they exist at all. A tell-tale sign of dyslexia in adults is avoidance of reading. Does that sound like Oswald to anyone?

In my opinion - and bear in mind that I'm not qualified enough to even legally tie my own shoelaces, so take it as you will - Oswald had Asperger's Syndrome. At least this explains ALL of Oswald's peccadillos - unlike dyslexia which would have to include a problem he did NOT have in order for it to be even a semi-valid diagnosis.

So why wasn't he diagnosed with this syndrome, I hear you cry? Simply because it was not recognised in the US until the '70s.

Any disputes over who stated he had dyslexia first is like wanting to lay claim to being the first to say the beatles would be a flop.

If you want to understand Oswald ( a ) research Asperger's & ( b ) look at the qualities and experiences he had which would make him attractive to certain types running certain operations - and then look at what operations were occuring at certain times which would fit Oswald's movements & actions.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Jack,

I don't want to beg any questions, but I take it whether or not these

photographs are of the same person remains a matter of discussion:

Sometimes those differences might possibly result from scanning over

and over, where Judyth has presented this rather striking illustration:

You have been extraordinarily uncharitable toward Judyth, even when she has had

reasonable explanations, such as the mafia betting line. I notice that one of these

women is wearing low heels, the other is in slippers. And how do we even know

WHEN these photos were taken or the CONTEXT that is so crucial for making the

kinds of claims that you have advanced? We are going to need a lot more proof.

Jim

For those who have not read Armstrong and who do not believe that there were two Marguerites:

Jack, I see as much similarity between the two Marguerites as I do between the two Jack Whites when I compare the photo of you on this forum with that on the other one.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...mp;#entry187742

But the two photos WERE TAKEN ABOUT FORTY YEARS APART!

Photos taken 40 years apart obviously will look different. The

photos of the two Marguerites were taken about 1957.

Can you not understand the difference?

Jack

Judyth comments on Jack's photograph:

We cannot see how ‘slender’ marguerite actually is in the ‘tall, slender’ photo because

that feature is obscured by the skirts and arms of women on both sides…Look closely

and you will see that the skirt’s actual width is obscured. It is more of an optical

illusion than a verified fact about how ‘slender’ marguerite is in the photo to the right.

Also, in the photo shown for comparison, we have already discussed the creation

of a potbelly due to thyroid disorder syndrome.

Inquires about Armstrong's methodology:

A question Judyth has raised but not sent specifically for posting concerns Armstrong's

methodology. Is it the case, Jack, that Armstrong accepts all the records and photographs

he collected as being true? Because Judyth has noticed some points about Lee in New York,

which, in her opinion, John did not understand. If he ran across a student's report that she

(Judyth) had pee'd in her pants, for example, would he have known that it was actually

mouse urine or taken it at face value?

I have raised this question before but not heard an answer. Since the greater the number of

documents and photographs he collected, the greater the probability that some of them are

forgeries or fakes, what principle or methods did he employ to sort out the authentic from

the inauthentic? As you know from our research together, this case is littered with phony

photos, reports, documents and films. Was it his belief that everything he accumulated

was free from all fault and genuine?

For those who have not read Armstrong and who do not believe that there were two Marguerites:

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

JIM RESPONDS TO JACK ABOUT THESE PHOTOGRAPHS:

JACK'S COMMENT:

Both of the LHO photos are identical to other versions of the

same photos that have been in JFK books and the WR for

many years, and are faithful reproductions.

The two Bringuier photos are identical except one is sepia tone

and the other is b/w.

This is getting very tiresome. The questions you ask sound like

they come from a "newbie".

JIM'S RESPONSE:

Thanks for your notes. The Bringuire photos are NOT identical, which of course is the point. The right image has a distorted face due to repeated scanning, which introduced a roughly 10% exaggeration. And, in many ways, I am a "newbie" to this aspect of the case, but sometimes a pair of fresh eyes can see things that others have missed. There are photographs of me at different stages of my life, for example, that anyone but me might have a hard time recognizing. But they are photographs of me.

On the Oswald photos, there seem to me to be a lot of SIMILARITIES in the kinds of features that you usually are eager to measure and compare, including the shape of the ears and distance between eyebrows and things like that. You are the EXPERT and I am the amateur, but I have to sort it all out for myself. And a lot of this goes back to "The Many Faces of Lee Harvey Oswald". Judyth has challenged the conclusion by suggesting a series of interpolations:

I know I have wandered off the reservation in the minds of some. I have always followed logic and evidence to the bitter end, once I have opened my mind to tackling a research project, including, for example, video fakery and no planes on 9/11. This Judyth thing fascinates me because she knows so much and has a lot of supporting evidence. I don't even know if I wish it weren't so, but I believe her and I believe in her and there's really not much I can do about it until the evidence leads me in a different direction. I have a great deal more to learn, but I am doing my best to sort things out.

That's just the way I am when I am studying a case. I do not take for granted that she is right about everything any more than I have taken for granted that you are right about everything. But my interactions with her have been so detailed and so extensive that, if she is not "the real deal", then I am at a loss. Some of your objections to Judyth's story may even be well-founded, but your mind is so massively closed on this subject that I am having a hard time taking you seriously. It seems to me that you are disposed to discount virtually EVERYTHING she has had to tell us, though I do appreciate your list of things about her that you take to be true.

I really wish we were on the same side, but obviously that is not how this is playing out. My questions about John's work, by the way, are quite sincere. After all of our work proving the FAKERY of photographs and films and other forms of planted proof in this case, how do we know which documents and records are real and which are not? I think that is a rather important question, where I am just the least bit floored that you would think asking about how he determined which were real and which are not is out of the ballpark. That seems to me to be a rather basic question.

I have the sense from what you have said before that John vacuumed up all the documents are records he could find and put them together in his book. No doubt, there had to be more to it than that, but what is that MORE? Of course, I am only getting my feet wet here, because I have never explored this aspect of the case before. But I trust you no more doubt my sincerity than I do yours. It seems to me that you are not exercising your critical faculties in this case as you have in the past, but then of course that is what you think is happening with me.

The mouse thing was relevant because that is an actual event where a student reported that Judyth had pee'd on herself when she was doing lab work and it had come from a mouse. The story has hung around forever and she has had to deal with it again and again over the years. She wrote me that, after thinking about John's modus operandi, she supposed the story she had pee'd on herself would have been immortalized in his book, had he included anything about her at all. That he did not bothers me.

I want to believe that he was more circumspect about what he included than he was in dismissing her on the basis of a superficial encounter. Why don't we both think about how MOST of Judyth's story and MOST of John's research might all be true together? I am impressed by HARVEY & LEE but I am also impressed by Judyth--and it has nothing to do with infatuation. I am not going to let this go, and I trust our friendship is going to survive. I can also use your help if figuring out how all of these pieces fit together.

These latest questions are unworthy of any newbie to the case.

Mouse urine, indeed!

JVB does say some things that SEEM TO BE TRUE.

1. She apparently was employed at Reily Coffee as an office worker at the same time as LHO

was employed as a "machinery oiler".

2. She apparently was acquainted with a person known to her as "Lee". (this despite

Armstrong's proof that this person preferred to be called "Harvey".)

3. She gives addresses of places where she resided during the period involved. I have no

reason to doubt that she lived at those addresses.

4. She documents a police raid (?) on one of those places and that other residents were

taken into custody but she was not. This is an odd event, but I have no reason to doubt

that such a raid took place.

5. She documents that as a high school student she excelled in science. There is no reason

to doubt that she was a bright science student.

6. Though she offers no documentation nor details, she says that because of her scientific

aptitude as a high school student, the CIA or military recruited her as a teen-ager to work

on some unspecified project, and sent her to New Orleans where the work was to be done.

However, for unknown reasons, the project was delayed, and she was put into a "holding

pattern" job at Reily Coffee awaiting the scientific project. I do not disbelieve this, because

there was evidence that Reily Coffee was a front for other covert activities. I can accept

this as REASONABLE, though there is no proof offered that it is true, and she offers no

details of her recruitment, what her parents thought, what her fiance thought, etc. A teen

girl going alone to live in New Orleans without prospects of employment or a place to live

is somewhat peculiar.

7. She says (there is no reason to doubt this), that in the midst of her romance with Lee,

her fiance Mr. Baker came to New Orleans and demanded that they get married immediately,

and that they eloped to Mobile, Alabama. Then, after one day of marriage, she says her

new husband deserted her, taking an offshore job in the Gulf, and he was gone all summer.

Though this is a very peculiar claim, I presume that she can back this up with marriage

records. She does not adequately explain how this peculiar event came about.

This is the extent of JVB claims that are PROVED to a reasonable extent. All other claims

are based on JVB personal statements which have yet to be proved true.

Jack

Edited March 26, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Greg, Interesting suggestion. I am starting to put together the personality and character of "the two Oswalds", neither of whom, as I understand it, would appear to have Asperger syndrome. Dawn Mereith has described the one known as "Lee" as hot-tempered and non-intellectual, having no interest in Marxism and incapable of speaking Russian. The one known as "Harvey", by contrast, is of a calm and intellectual demeanor, fluent in Russian and interested in political philosophy. Moreover, "Harvey", in particular, had a wife and even a girlfriend, from what Judyth has to tell us, which does not support the notion that he was socially inept. There still appears to be considerable room for questions about these identifications. Judyth, for example, who (according to Jack) knew the one called "Harvey" in New Orleans (who called himself "Lee") had a Cajun accent and hated the name "Harvey". According to Jack, however, Judyth knew "Harvey" who was Hungarian and liked the name "Harvey". It would appear that they cannot both be right, even about "Harvey". And if, as I understand it, dyslexia is a learning disorder that manifests itself as a difficulty with reading, spelling, and sometimes mathematics, that suggests that either "Harvey" didn't read or he wasn't dyslexic. This looks like an area of inquiry that warrants further exploration.

Asperger syndrome

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Asperger syndrome

Classification and external resources

Seated boy facing 3/4 away from camera, looking at a ball-and-stick model of a molecular structure. The model is made of colored magnets and steel balls.

People with Asperger's often display intense interests, such as this boy's fascination with molecular structure.

ICD-10 F84.5

ICD-9 299.80

OMIM 608638

DiseasesDB 31268

MedlinePlus 001549

eMedicine ped/147

MeSH F03.550.325.100

Asperger syndrome is an autism spectrum disorder, and people with it therefore show significant difficulties in social interaction, along with restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior and interests. It differs from other autism spectrum disorders by its relative preservation of linguistic and cognitive development. Although not required for diagnosis, physical clumsiness and atypical use of language are frequently reported.[1][2]

Asperger syndrome is named for the Austrian pediatrician Hans Asperger who, in 1944, described children in his practice who lacked nonverbal communication skills, demonstrated limited empathy with their peers, and were physically clumsy.[3] Fifty years later, it was standardized as a diagnosis, but many questions remain about aspects of the disorder.[4] For example, there is doubt about whether it is distinct from high-functioning autism (HFA);[5] partly because of this, its prevalence is not firmly established.[1] The diagnosis of Asperger's has been proposed to be eliminated, replaced by a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder on a severity scale.[6]

The exact cause is unknown, although research supports the likelihood of a genetic basis; brain imaging techniques have not identified a clear common pathology.[1] There is no single treatment, and the effectiveness of particular interventions is supported by only limited data.[1] Intervention is aimed at improving symptoms and function. The mainstay of management is behavioral therapy, focusing on specific deficits to address poor communication skills, obsessive or repetitive routines, and physical clumsiness.[7] Most individuals improve over time, but difficulties with communication, social adjustment and independent living continue into adulthood.[4] Some researchers and people with Asperger's have advocated a shift in attitudes toward the view that it is a difference, rather than a disability that must be treated or cured.[8]

The only source of which I am aware for the information that Lee Harvey Oswald was dyslexic is Judyth Vary Baker.]

Sorry, Professor Fetzer. Norman Mailer wrote about Oswald's dyslexia in his book Oswald's Tale, published in 1995.

And I did respond to Judyth.

Kathy C

Mary Ferrell told me that LHO was dyslexic in 1975. I had to ask what the word meant,

and she explained. Mary discovered it by having read every writing attributed to him.

It is reported in many books.

Jack

This is my one and only entry into this quagmire.

Oswald was never diagnosed as dyslexic. I'd say there was good reason for this: he wasn't. It is primarily a READING disability. Any spelling problems are secondary to that - if they exist at all. A tell-tale sign of dyslexia in adults is avoidance of reading. Does that sound like Oswald to anyone?

In my opinion - and bear in mind that I'm not qualified enough to even legally tie my own shoelaces, so take it as you will - Oswald had Asperger's Syndrome. At least this explains ALL of Oswald's peccadillos - unlike dyslexia which would have to include a problem he did NOT have in order for it to be even a semi-valid diagnosis.

So why wasn't he diagnosed with this syndrome, I hear you cry? Simply because it was not recognised in the US until the '70s.

Any disputes over who stated he had dyslexia first is like wanting to lay claim to being the first to say the beatles would be a flop.

If you want to understand Oswald ( a ) research Asperger's & ( b ) look at the qualities and experiences he had which would make him attractive to certain types running certain operations - and then look at what operations were occuring at certain times which would fit Oswald's movements & actions.

Edited March 25, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

JUDYTH REPLIES TO DON JEFFRIES:

I think I talked him out of it.

I saw his firearms on the 3rd floor at Banister's building (we called it that in 1963 -- the Warren Commission and researchers call it the Newman Buiklding...By the way, Lee did not refer to the building where he worked as the "Texas School Book Depository." The building had a different name than that....The TSBD was a company that rented that building. I think the WC called the Newman Building that to draw attention away from Guy Banister. Banister moved into that building before it was purchased by Mr. Newman, who had FBI ties, by the way, which probably everybody knows...

Firearms and much more were stored on the 3rd floor, ignored by everybody (why?) ...This is where Banister kept plenty of anti-Casro munitions, tents, rifles, you name it...Interestingly, after the raid at Lake Pontchartrain, a lot more stuff ended up there on the third floor....

Here I saw a .38 long-nose S &W that belonged to Lee and a souvenir -- he called it, a silver Derringer....He said he owned no other weapons...No rifle...Soon Marina Oswald would arrive from Irving, TX......Again, I hope I talked him out of 'warning shot' scenario.....

What irritates me is their finding a holster in his boarding house room, but then they have him supposedly just sticking a SHORT NOSE S &W in his pants and carrying it like that, supposedly at the Texas Theatre -- Think about this a minute.

YOU CANNOT RUN WITH A SNUB-NOSE S & W STUCK IN YOUR PANTS. IT WILL FALL OUT.....WHICH MEANS THAT, HE CARRIED IT IN HIS POCKET? BUT WHEN HE GETS TO THE TEXAS THEATRE HE DECIDES INSTEAD TO STICK IT IN HIS PANTS AT THE WAIST? LOGIC APPLIED SAYS 'NOT LIKELY.'

NOW PLEASE READ THIS CAREFULLY.

I HAVE READ ALL THE ARREST ACCOUNTS CAREFULLY. SOME VARY. I READ THE ARRESTING OFFICER'S COMMENTS WITH SPECIAL CARE.

IN TESTIMONY, THE ARRESTING OFFICER SAID HE APPROACHED LEE, WITH HIS REVOLVER DRAWN...WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE MOVING IN ON LEE OSWALD UNTIL THIS POLICEMAN ARRIVES...WHEN HE ARRIVES, THEN THEY MOVE IN......

NOW, THESE POLICE DO NOT TELL PEOPLE TO LEAVE, NOR DO THEY ACT AS IF LEE OSWALD IS ARMED AND DANGEROUS. YET HE IS SUPPOSED TO BE A SUSPECT....THEY 'INSPECT' ONE AFER ANOTHER OF THE FEW IN THE THEATRE, CLOSING IN ON HIM...THEY WOULD LIKE HIM TO RUN, SO THEY CAN SHOOT HIM DEAD...

LEE UNDERSTANDS THIS.

THOUGH HE IS A 'SUSPECT' IN THE TIPPIT MURDER, THEY ACT AS IF HE IS UNARMED....

IN OHER WORDS, THEY K-N-O-W HE IS UNARMED, PEOPLE.

THEY KNOW IT. THEY KNOW HE WLL NOT DRSAW A REVOLVER AND START SHOOTING A EVERYBODY.

THEY HOPE HE'LL LOSE HIS SELF-CONTROL AND BOLT SO THEY CAN SHOOT HIM.

THEY APPROACH SLOWLY AND WITH THEIR REVOLVERS DRAWN.

NEXT -- THE ARRESTING OFFICER SAID LEE SUDDENLY PULLED HIS SNUB-NOSED REVOLVER FROM HIS PANTS WAIST AREA AND THE OFFICER STOPPED HIM FROM SHOOTING HIM AND STRUGGLED FOR POSSESSION OF THE REVOLVER....

BUT WHEN DID THE OFFICER PUT AWAY HIS REVOLVER, WITH WHICH HE APPROACHED LEE OSWALD?

HE NEVER DID.

IT WOULD DEFY LOGIC THAT THE OFFICER APPROACHING LEE WITH REVOLVER DRAWN WOULD PUT IT AWAY BEFORE HIS ENCOUNTER WITH LEE.

FAR MORE LIKELY, THE RIGGED REVOLVER, WHICH COULD NOT FIRE AND HURT ANYBODY -- WHICH MODEL WAS A FAVORITE MODEL FOR OFF-DUTY POLICE TO CARRY, BY THE WAY -- WAS THRUST AT OSWALD IN AN ATTEMPT TO SHOOT HIM AND LEE, A TRAINED MARINE, STOPPED HIM FROM DOING SO.

THE OFFICERS THEN COULD NOT SHOOT BECAUSE THEY MIGHT HAVE HIT THE ARRESING OFFICER.

LEE SAW IT COMING.

HE STRUCK THE OFFICER SO HE WOULDN'T BE SHOT, NOT KNOWING THIS REVOLVER WOULD BE PLANTED ON HIS PERSON AFTER THEY SHOT HIM DEAD.

THE ARRESTING OFFICER WAS IN ABSOLUTELY NO DANGER AND MAY EVEN HAVE TRIED TO THRUST HIS REVOLVER INTO LEE'S PANTS, FROM HIS DESCRIPTION OF THE EVENT -- A DESCRIPTION, HOWEVER, THAT INCLUDED HIS SAYING THAT HE HAD HIS REVOLVER DRAWN INSIDE THE THEATER.

HENCE LEE THEN SHOUTS THAT HE IS NOT RESISTING ARREST AS THEY PULL HIM DOWN---SO THEY COULD NOT SHOOT HIM....

SEVERAL ACCOUNTS TALK ABOUT HEARING A 'CLICK' WHICH IS, IN FACT, ABSURD IF YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT KIND OF REVOLVER. ACCORDING TO (NOW DECEASED, BUT I HAVE HIS CORRESPONDENCE) BALLISICS EXPERT JOHN RITCHSON -- THE WAY IT WAS RIGGED NOT TO FIRE. IT WOULD NOT HAVE MADE A SOUND AS DESCRIBED...

ANOTHER ITEM TO CONSIDER: THE HOLSTER.

WOULD LEE OSWALD HAVE JUST PULLED THE SNIUB NOSE .38 FROM THE HOLSTER INSTEAD OF JUST GRABBING THE HOLSTER WITH REVOLVER AND HURRIEDLY BELTING IT ON? WHAT'S A HOLSTER FOR?

BUT, YOU SEE, THEY HAD TO MAKE SURE THAT A HOLSTER WAS PRESENT IN HIS BOARDING HOUSE ROOM TO HELP TIE HIM TO OWNING A REVOLVER...

WE HAVE RECENLY LEARNED THAT THE DALLAS POLICE WERE FAMOUS FOR PLANTING FALSE EVIDENCE BACK THEN, AND OVERDID SOME OF THE PLANTED EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE...

HERE'S A FACT:

LEE OSWALD DIDN'T LKE HOLSTERS AND -- VERY CAREFUL WIH HIS MONEY -- WOULD NOT HAVE PURCHASED ONE.

HE CARRIED THE S&W I SAW IN A SMALL GREEN BAG,

HE THOUGHT HOLSTERS WERE 'TOO OBVIOUS.'

HOW DO I KNOW? BECAUSE HE BROUGHT A SMALL GREEN BAG TO CARRY THE REVOLVER (WHICH WAS STORED IN ITS ORIGINAL BOX) AND MENTIONED IT.

I DO NOT KNOW A THING ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN DALLAS, PERSONALLY, ONLY WHAT LEE TOLD ME SOME 37 1/2 HOURS EARLIER.....

BUT I DO KNOW THAT LEE OSWALD SAID HE KEPT HIS FIREARMS AT BANISTER'S BECAUSE HIS BABY, JUNE LEE, WAS WALKING AND HE DID NOT WANT HER TO GET INTO HIS GUNS. HE SAID "GUNS."

HE ALSO SAID, AS A JOKE, THAT HE KEPT HIS FIREARMS AT BANISTER'S BUILDING SO IN CASE MARINA GOT REALLY, REALLY MAD AT HIM, SHE WOULDN'T SHOOT HIM.

HE MADE LOTS OF JOKES AND THEY WERE ALL WRY AND IRONIC ONES, LIKE THAT. SOMETIMES IT WAS A BIT HARD TO KNOW WHETHER HE WAS PULLING YOUR LEG OR BEING SEROUS!

NOTE THAT GEORGE DEMOHRENSCHILDT IN "I'M A PATSY!" (WHICH THE HSCA HAS), LISTS ABOUT A DOZEN JOKES THAT LEE TOLD HIM...

THEREFORE I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE DALLAS' FINEST PLANTED THE HOLSTER.

JUST AS THEY TRIED TO SAY LEE OSWALD HAD A 'MAP' -- IN ALL THE PAPERS...SHOWING THE BULLET PATHS [THE TRAJECTORIES] HE PLANNED TO SHOOT! -- THEN QUIETLY IT GOES AWAY AS IT WAS NO SUCH THING...BUT OSWALD IS THUS A HATED MAN...

I DONT' KNOW EVERYHING ABOUT LEE, OF COURSE, BUT I KNOW ENOUGH AND REMEMBER ENOUGH TO EASILY PICK OUT WHAT IS TRUE AND WHAT IS NOT ABOUT A LOT OF THE "SO-CALLED EVIDENCE" (THE SAME TERM LEE USED, BY THE WAY).

I HAVE TO STRAIGHTEN THESE THINGS OUT FOR POSTERITY BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. FOR AS JFK SAID, WE ARE ALL MORTAL.

I'M DOING THIS FOR JFK, TOO, [HOPEFULLY] TO FORCE THE GOVERNMENT TO ADMIT THEY PULLED A COUP ON THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

THAT'S WHY I AM GRATEFUL THAT AFTER EFFORTS OF TEN YEARS, WHERE I KEPT GETTING HUMBLED AND SHOUTED DOWN, DR. FETZER IS KEEPING THIS THREAD ON TRACK, DESPITE ALL SORTS OF SIDE QUESTIONS -- WHICH HAVE BEEN ANSWERED ELSEWHERE BUT SEEMS EVERYBODY 'FORGOT' THESE QUESIONS THAT WERE ANSWERED -- SUCH AS THE OFF-THE-SUBJECT ONE ABOUT MY TRANSLATING HIEROGLYPHS, WHICH THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE ACTUALLY CAN DO, INCLUDING ME, BUT WHICH IS COMPLETELY OFF-TOPIC.

THIS IS HOW THEY EXHAUSTED ME BEFORE, FOR I HAVE STRENGTH LIMITATIONS.

IT IS LIKE HAVING TO JUMP HURDLE AFTER HURDLE JUST TO BE ABLE TO POST ANSWERS ON SERIOUS QUESTIONS, SUCH AS THE SERIOUS AND RELEVANT QUESTION YOU SO ASKED, WHICH I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY.

JVB

Jim,

I didn't mean to criticize the way this thread has been handled. I didn't realize JVB was a member, and also was unaware that it is physically that difficult for her to post. Sorry for any confusion.

Judith, I'm interested in exactly what LHO told you about the impending assassination. Of particular interest to me is the comment about him perhaps firing a warning shot. This would indicate he was going to be carrying a gun (or have access to one) that day. Did he tell you that he was bringing a rifle to the TSBD? I apologize if this has been gone over before, and you've previously addressed this subject. Thanks.