Dave Weaver

Pamela, It is not about Judyth communicating with me or anyone, she has it the way she wants, anyway, I don't care about that anymore too, to tell you the truth. All I was doing, was to offer her a computer, for free. What she does with it, I don't care, but she said that not having a computer is a big problem for her, so why shouldn't I refuse to help her if I can. Naturaly I was expecting to get such an answer, be it from you, or another persons near to Judyth, i am sorry to say that. For me the computer offer has nothing to do with what I think about her actions and her story. Your problem Pamela is, that you still think that my posts were and are motivated by other's,whereas they were always motivated by the untrue things she told not only about me, and the doubt I have ever since about her truthfullness, therefore I asked for answers, because maybe I was wrong in judging here also based ont that fact, but how can I know, if she answers no one, repeat no one on any forum, since 1999, when It comes to show the real proof about the loveaffair and the Castro thing. But, if she did tell the truth about her story or not, is not the issue here, when it comes to personal hardships in regard of material things, I will always help her if I can, like I always do here in Germany for a very long time Pamela. I have nothing personal against Judyth, I do not take things as personal as you believe, never had, I just say she should have answered some very basic questions and put some more truth in her bulk mails. Pamela, I am not the reason why the book was not published since 1999, neither was I the reason she needed to relocate, her concussions ,her eye problems or the reason for her loosing any job she had. I am not the cause for any problem she had or has, nor are other's on this or any other forum Judyth was or is a member of. Pamela, I did read your topic about how to handle witnesses in the future, generaly I agree, and maybe that is the good also learned from Judyth's case,namely, how not to do it.

Judyth, I admit, I feel and felt sorry for your private situation, ever since I learned more about it. As I am a person who does have no joy in hearing about personal hardships person's II "know" suffer, and being also able to not let my heart be one of stone, I would like to help you. I am working with computer's on a daily basis, both selling and repairing them, and being my own boss in this profession,I hereby offer to solve your computer problem, at no cost at all for you in regard of the hardware itself. Please let me know either via Wim or directly, if you need a functioning computer, inkluding monitor, CD-Burner, Keyboard, Mouse and Printer. I think I have also a Scanner for you. The only thing I will not provide is a pre-installed operating system, that's only for security reasons, no not mine, but yours, the software itself, I could provide also at no cost. If you have interrest, let me know, I can send the hardware to Wim, he can have it checked just to make sure, there is nothing sinister hidden in it, and then send it to you. Alternatively, if you do not want a computer as a gift, I suggest Wim providing a postal address or bank account number to interrested person's, and I am sure some members both here and on other forum's, or persons known to you and other's, are willing to give a little of their money. Computer's are pretty cheap nowadys, even new ones. So once your book comes's out, you can pay back the money to Wim, and he will donate it to a charity organisation. This offer and suggestion may surprise you and other's on both side's of the aisle, but hey, that's how I am, if I can help, I will. In addition to the computer matter, I suggest the installation of a Judyth Baker support fund. Uwe aka David 14.January 2005

Judyth, why do you insist on letting people think I have hidden my real name from you ? You know that this is not true. You never did tell me that me using the name David or Dave Weaver on the internet is a problem for you, or I could not be trusted because of that. You even addressed me with my real firstname in most of the mails we exchanged starting around June 2004. You know my full name from me since that time and maybe even longer via Nancy. In every mail you got from me did it not say the following: -----Original Message----- From: Uwe Leybold [mailto:uleybold@t-online.de] Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 12:45 AM To: Judyth Vary Baker Subject: Re: thanks for this Nancy ------------------------------------ Take also a look here, same date, send to Wim. ----- Original Message ----- From: Uwe Leybold To: wim dankbaar Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 12:52 AM Subject: Fw: thanks for this Nancy ---------------- Or here: -----Original Message----- From: Uwe Leybold [mailto:uleybold@t-online.de] Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 4:27 PM To: Judyth Vary Baker Subject: Re: I continued to audit Russian in college and have a dual language text to prove it. ---------------- -----Original Message----- From: Uwe Leybold [mailto:uleybold@t-online.de] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 12:36 AM To: Judyth Vary Baker Subject: Re: Judyth Baker--Cancer Researcher not showing up on JFK Lancer --------------- This one I love realy, attention Virus attack !!! -----Original Message----- From: Uwe Leybold [mailto:uleybold@t-online.de] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 12:31 AM To: Judyth Vary Baker Subject: Re: I did send you no Virus knowingly, attachment is only a screenshot --------------------- Yes Judyth, everything faked, sure must be, because otherwise you would have told a lie to member's on this forum. Now please ask Wim, to look for all the mails with the faked address and name from me, which he got, even before I ever had contact with you. You may also look through all the faked mails I did send you, take my name from it, go into google, find me, and then call me. You can also ask Martin, Pamela and Anita, I never did hide my real name to them. Or just ask Wim, he has my phone number, and he also has my address here in germany, because he did send me 2 DVD's last year via postal service. So I repeat, you know my full and real name at least since July 2004, you also called me by my first name in many of the mails you did send to me. There are things that have changed over the years Judyth, mainly the number of the year. Every year since 1999 you have announced that the book will come out, if not the same year, then at least soon. What has not changed, obviouly is your way of behaviour towards those who won't take your word alone as proof. And what has not changed is this: The public has never seen one ounce of proof about your 2 centerclaims. 1)Affair with Lee 2)Participation in the "Get-Castro" project. You do describe yourself as a living witness to those points, but a witness should not only demand to be believed, he should also deliver the proof for his claims. Judyth I know real research takes time, but I thought you are a witness, and you said you had the proof for it already when you came out in 1999. So where's the problem ? And to clarify the e-mail issue at the time of your move from Holland, you told Nancy, that your mail address would not be valid anymore and you would no longer be able to receive any mail send to that mail address. I told Nancy, I see no reason, why a move to another country should require a change of the mail address, at least technicaly, it is no problem accessing a mail account regardless of the country you relocate to. So I said to Nancy,that I think you are not telling the truth to her, and maybe you just wanted to receive no more mails from Nancy. And of cours it turned out, that your mail account was still valid after you did relocate, and most probably still is. So Nancy was realy hurt that you did not tell the truth to her. I'm talking about this mail address: elect63@xs4all.nl

Nancy, I could not post the timecards here due to attachment space problems, so I posted them over at lancerforum. Here's the link to the post: http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p..._id=23124&page= Let me know if it is Ok for you. Maybe John can take care of posting them up here also.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Dawn, there are actually 2 links to biographies in Terry's post. This is easy explained, because the second part of Terry's post is a copy/paste job of Nancy's full post including the link to Nancy's biography on bottom of Nancy's post. She then did only highlight the part that makes it clear that Nancy had obviously forgotten, that she did mention Dixie's mail in her post. So Terry's Biographie link is the second one then, and Nancy's the first one.

Computer and electronics specialist from Germany, realname Uwe Leybold, as some here know already, but I am being used to be called Dave or David Weaver on JFK related forums. Interrested in the JFK assasination since age 8, still hopeing to learn much more about the case, that's why I am also here.

Dawn maybe you're right, sure you're right, but let's look at what we have here. First of all, I was not attacking Judyth in this thread, I was asking, and based on her answers or none answers stating what I conclude from that. Also I was saying that she is dancing aroung answering my quetions, by using things that have no relevance to what I've asked her. Dawn, am I alone in thinking, wait a minute, I would be realy interrested in what Judyth Baker has to backup her claims (claims not ment in a negative way), cause this has been going on since 1999, and don't forget dear members she had her innitial book ready then, so the proof for everything was already there 1999, yet we only have claims about the 2 centerpoints of her story, with one additional claim, namely the foreknowledge of the assasination, unprovable by her ,according to Judyth herself, and she showed us, in my mind, believable proof about things I will mention later. Furthermore,I only followed Judyth Baker's invitatation, because Judyth Baker said come to the Educationforum, ask me questions I am a living witness, I was Lee Harvey Oswald's girlfriend and he told me about the assasination 2 days prior to the event. And I, Judyth Baker was involved in a "Get-Castro" project in NO, together with David Ferrie, Mary Sherman , that project also involved Jack Ruby, whom I knew also. I have the proof to verify what I claim. I will answer fair and honest questions. The above is a summary of different statements over the years packed and simplyfied, but in essence correct. Replace Educationforum by Usenet or other places , or by mail contact. So please let's find someone here on this forum , who will be regarded by Judyth Baker as fair and honest, so that she finaly, after many many years, can answer and show her proof. And no, I never doubted that she worked at Reily's or did, and later got promoted for, her highschool cancer research work/project. She has produced proof in form of newspaperarticles,letters and paychecks from Reily's, so I had no reason to question that part of her testimony, but that leaves me somehow standing in the rain, because what about the other things she claims, why haven't we seen any proof since 1999,although she repeatetly said, she has and will show the proof to those who are honest and fair. Anyone out there, who has seen the proof yet, I mean proof like proof, not so called circumstancial evidence like: There was a young girl seen around Ferrie and Sherman in 1963 I had a dress and shoes the same like the person in a certain film I looked like a twin of Marina Oswald (Did you realy ?) and spoke Russian (do you still ? ) Well Judyth, I have a russian friend, maybe you want to talk to him some, but that doesn't proof anything anyway. Maybe there are those honest and fair members here, who think that one can start and ask Judyth Baker 2 of the most important unanswered questions (well the names and testimonies of some of her witnesses are known to some here already) she has chosen to not answer up until know, at least in places where she offered to answer fair and honest questions to the best of her knowledge. 1) What proof do you have that you were Lee Harvey Oswald's girlfriend/lover, are your witnesses you say you have credible, have they been tested in any way, did they tell anyone else about what they did say in their testimony before, what evidence do you have otherwise. 2) What proof do you have that you were involved in a "Get-Castro " project in NO 1963, together with David Ferrie, Mary Sherman and Lee Harvey Oswald and of course also Jack Ruby. are your witnesses you may have credible, have they been tested in any way, did they tell anyone else about what they did say in their testimony before, what evidence do you have otherwise. Dear members of this forum, the issue is not, who i am, the issue is that we have a witness to the case, right here on this forum, who, since 1999 has made offers to show proof about what the witness claims, but since 1999 has not done so about the 2 most important claims she makes. Either you are honest and fair, and if you qualify, you get the answers, else read the book, she says. Did I understand that right Judyth Baker ? Too bad no one seems to have qualified here yet. Instead, and you can read that all over the internet, Judyth is in constant fight with those she says are treating her unfair and only wanting to either prevent the book, make her look crazy and/or like a hoaxter or have some other agenda . Who those persons are, and what their agenda is, you will learn from Judyth, cause she does decide it, but watch out, once she declared someone a not friendly party, you better stay away from that person, else the same could happen to you. I don't say she should not defend herself and her name, that is not my issue, my problem is that she writes trillions of lines about who the evildoers are,who are against her and what their rhetorical tricks are, but is not answering to fair and honest questions that do ask for the proof to her 2 centerclaims. Well, i am wrong, she anwers sometimes, saying, you can read it in the book. Well Judyth, is that PR or what is it, if it is PR, i'll advice you to fire your PR person(s) immediately. But, I see, there's no way for me to get an answer from you, I am not worth it. So, I hereby donate those questions so that a fair and honest person can take them and ask Judyth Baker to ask her those, maybe she will then answer. Maybe John Simkin can ask them in a post, so that members (but only those honest and fair ones please) can start evaluating at least some of the evidence. Finaly let me say this: I have, both here and on jfklancerforum, told my name to those I had personal contact with,I have done that immediately and without hesitation, from John Simkin to Gary Mack, from Judyth Baker to Bill Miller and Richard Smith, from Robert Vernon to Wim Dankbaar and Nancy Eldreth, everyone knows who I am. All they have to do is to type in my name into google and you can find even my telephone number and address here in germany (last digit of phonenumber could be 8 instead of 7 as I switch lines sometimes) and give me a call, or simply ask me for the number in a mail. Wim and Nancy did already do this, and guess what Judyth, it did work, I was on the line (well actualy I have a lot of little gadgets, but that is another story ... ) So, in my case Judyth, you once again try to use things that are long known to you and others, namely my real name and verified to you by both Wim and Nancy, as a tool to avoid the issue, namely an honest answer to my questions, you base that decission of yours not to answer me, with the allegation that i am not honest and fair towards you, something you came up quickly with, once you realized that I am not willing to rely solely on your words and so called circumstancial evidence. I mean, dear researchers, are you looking for answers here, or are we a book club all in happy anticipation for the release of Enid Blyton's next book "Five friends and the laughing coffee bean " ? Judyth Baker is serving the plates since 1999,at one point you're gonna have to realy find out if the meal is real or if the cook is a crook.

So in short Mrs. Baker, you have now confirmed that you don't have the proof to make your claims become facts in the eye of the public. Maybe you have a problem with my style of asking questions ? Mrs. Baker, all your talk about my or anyone other's style of writing, has no relevance to your storie's veracity. I am german by chance, and left school some 20 years ago, I hated rhetorics class, cause I am not needing it, never planned to become a writer or holding speaches. I'm always saying what I think the way I do, and your try to use that against me shows only that you're running out of arguments. Your talk about who I am, and what my real name is, has nothing to do with your storie's veracity, trying to use that against me only shows that you are running out of arguments. Btw. look through your mails, I think I told you my realname in my first mail, as I usualy do when I have contact with members on JFK forums. You may also ask Martin, Pamela, Wim, Anita they also know my real name. Nancy and Wim even have my phone number and address. You are the one claiming deeper knowledge since 1999, not me or anyone else,you are promising for years to produce the proof,and it is you that could not satisfy the publics curiousity and justify their willingness to give you the benefit of the doubt. You have not presented one shred of evidence that prooves that you were Lee Harvey Oswald's girlfriend/lover and did also participate together with David Ferrie ,Jack Ruby and Lee Harvey Oswald in a "get Castro" project. All you do is claiming Mrs. Baker, about those 3 points. And btw. your point about witness contamination is to be regarded as classical, remember what you did answer when I said that you are contaminating yourseslf by doing research of your own. Bingo ! How often did you speak with Anna Lewis before she made her testimony ? How often did you speak with any other witness yourself before they made their testimony ? Nothing what you came and do come up with after you gave your innitial testimony to Martin and started researching (well who knows when you realy started it anyway) will help you to have your claims about points 1 and 2 become accepted as facts. And as you said, you can not prove that you had prior knowledge, so sorry, it's just a claim then and can never become a fact in the eye of the public, unless maybe someday there turns up a tape with that conversations you had with Lee. I never doubted that you did highschool cancer research, I never doubted you where promoted, I never doubted you worked at Reily's. Cause you showed proof of that, about the other things you only made unproven claims. And backing away from 100% now makes me feel absolutely certain, that your book will only prove what good researcher you have become, but not that you did what you said you did (see points 1 and 2) .

Mrs. Baker, i don't care if it is a miss of the topic, Mr. Simkin is the boss here, he will let me know, until now, he never had said anything negative in response to what I wrote to you, quite to the contrary. David Reitzes has not made up anything you wrote on the internet over the years. You just want to make us all believe he did. Big difference !!! And like with so many other things, it is just a smokescreen, while you try to build up all the dark and evil forces in the readers heads, who will serve as an excuse for your book not having the proof it need's to let your claims become facts, in regard of your affair, the "get Castro" project participation and the prior knowledge of the asssasination. I and I'm sure many other's simply wanted to see your so called proof in our lifetime. Btw., you guarantee that the book will be published in 2005, or can we expect your publisher to be threatend so he won't publish it or other things that will prevent publication ? What's next Mrs. Baker ? You're a clever gal, at least you think you are .

Judyth, if no one answers my question on lancer I ask them also here now: 1) Can you prove beyond reasonable doubt, that you were involved in a "get Castro" project together with David Ferrie, Jack Ruby and Lee Harvey Oswald ? 2) Can you prove beyond reasonable doubt, that you were Lee Harvey Oswald's girlfriend/lover ? 3)Can you prove beyond reasonable doubt that you had prior knowledge of the assasination ? Or can you "only" prove that in a way that "honest researcher's =those who have chosen to not question you and your story ?" will be satisfied with the evidence you present(ed). Is it not fair to ask that Judyth, even if I am a "doubting Tom" in regard of your story. Is it not a valid opinion of mine, when I say that if none of the points 1-3 are answered by you with yes, that I can rightfully say, that for me that are "only" claims, which are not proven, then. So, just to satisfy my curiousity, can you prove points 1-3 beyond reasonable doubt ? You consider yourself an important witness, but can you prove that Judyth, to the satisfactory of those who will look at your evidence that you will present in your book ? Will the reader, be left with no other choice than to believe you, or will there be room for interpretation of your evidence. Am i right in saying this : If you have 100% proof about points 1-3, than your "claims" become facts. If you have not 100% proof, than your "claims" are just that, unproven claims. Up until now, the evidence you presented on the internet, was not satisfactory to make facts out of your claims, I trust that the proof will be in your book. And in reading your posts in response to Reitzes claims, well Judyth, it is not Reitzes fault, when you are the one stating claims like facts, only to later have a lot of explaining to do about, why you forgot to mention that you were only guessing or interpreting based on paritally wrong information (as you say) given to you. Did you not write the things Reitzes has posted, even if you now explain why, and based on what information, you did write that ? You are an importand witness (if not the most importand one alive) and participant, as you say, so I think one should expect from you, and one should also apply,only the highest standard in regards of presenting and evaluating your evidence. Or am I wrong ?

I wish you all a happy new year . May 2005 be a good year for you and your family. My areas of interrest are very wide, but here are some things I hope we can find out more about: 1) The space race and how Oswald eventualy was involved in a secret program to monitor and spy on the USSR's space efforts. In my mind this is still somehow overlooked. The US had placed radar specialists into the USSR,what was that programm's name, who did overview it, are there known agents still alive and ready to talk ? Oswald did photograph military installations if I remember right, what installations, and had they anything to do with space. 2)George DeMohrenschild and his brother Dimitri, the white Russian's in the USA and especialy Dallas, their connections to remnants of the 3'rd Reich and the ultra conservative circles and mainplayers in the US and intelligence agencies. Quote George DeMohrenschild "Lee was like a son or like one of my soldiers for me..." A soldier for what army ? 3) Israel's mossad and if he played a role in the assasination, as I think one can not rule that out. Possible motive here, the israely atomic programm. See how far the circles go nowadays, we had the USA,Israel and France together with parts of the Palastinians getting rid of Arrafat (my opinion). Or do you think it was just a coincidence that Arrafat died when he died. So we still have to look at all directions, there are pr's and contra's, but as long as the case is open, almost every theory (well no not the Alien's of course) should be regarded as worth looking in. Also, did you know that german chancelor Adenauer did only narrowly escape an assasination attempt by a secret israely group in 1952. This attempt in was keept a secret by all sides, in order to not endanger the german-israely relations, although the members of that group were known and some of them were caught only to be left off the hook. Finaly Luciane Goldberg (?) of Monicagate fame, her tracks go back to Oswald and she is probably a CIA member. By the Goldberg example I mean, we should try and see what person's carreer's looked like that had anything to do in the jfk assasination, what path did they take afterwards, did their names surface in any other political or criminal scandal as whistleblower's, witnesses or just as persons commenting on it. Some of the persons I would like to see interviewed about their "real" knowledge: Fidel Castro George Bush sr. The sister of Jacky Kennedy Onassis, if still alive. Ellen Rometsch Thomas Masen Gerald Patrick Hemming, about his work at Klein's Jack Edwin Dougherty (I think he is dead), or any close family members Gerhard Frey And I would be very interrested what the german BND and other foreign agencies have in his files relating to the assasination.

As I am living in germany, the internet is the only tool I have, apart from book's and video/dvd, to get info about the case. The interresting thing is, Oswald asked for 2 numbers and only wrote down one. Why ? Most probably there's no answer to that question.

There was one US Army Colonel by the name of Michael Smollen (sp?) kidnapped in Venezuela, but i couldn't find an exact date yet on the internet. On this page the year is either 1963 or 1964 http://insidecostarica.com/specialreports/...ng_industry.htm

Ron, I just used google, both web search and groups, I am no researcher :-( . Search for the name of the officer's and put them into " " . I did also look at the Dallas Municipal JFK collection, but found nothing there. You may try to contact Matt Allieson (sp) known as altasrcrd or so on usenet, the affadavit I posted was copied from one of his posts on usenet. From what I did read, the 2 number's Oswald asked the operator for, could have been privat/work phone numbers of lawyer Abt.

Hi Ron, here's the affidavit of Popplewell: AFFIDAVIT IN ANY FACT My name is J.L. Popplewell. I entered the Dallas Police Department January 11th, 1957. I have worked the fifth floor jail most of this time. The 23rd day of November, 1963, at 3PM, I was assigned to guard the area in front of Lee Harvey Oswald's cell, watching all of his movements to see that he didn't hurt himself. At about 4PM Lt. Lord called on the jail phone and instructed me to put Oswald on the phone. Oswald asked the operator for two telephone numbers - then asked me for pencil and paper while in the telephone booth. I tore a small piece of plain paper, about two by three inches from the telephone record sheet that hung outside the telephone booth; then handed this piece of paper and my pencil to him. Oswald wrote a number on this paper and then returned my pencil to me. Then he asked if he could call later. Oswald did not get his call through at this time. I called Lt. Lord and informed him that Oswald did not get his party and wanted to call again later. About 8PM Lt. Lord came up to the jail and told me to let Oswald use the phone. I was instructed to step back away from the booth so the phone call could be private. From this location I watched the prisoner talking to someone. He used the phone about thirty minutes. I asked Oswald if he got his call through and he answered, yes. I then returned him to his cell. About four months ago on a Monday, I received a call from an FBI agent who wanted to know about a slip of paper with a phone number on it. This was supposed to have been in Oswald's pocket when he died. The agent asked if we allowed prisoners to keep phone numbers on their person. I said that if a call wasn't completed the first time, we could let them write the number down and keep it for a later call. The agent asked me the size of the paper I might have given Oswald to write on. I told him it was probably torn off of a telephone record sheet hanging outside the telephone booth; that the paper was plain, unmarked, about two by three inches. The telephone sheet is usually used for writing names of prisoners who use the phone, but due to the large volume of prisoners that weekend, it was possible I missed writing Oswald's name down on it. I have been unable to locate a sheet with his name on it. Subscribed and sworn August 20th, 1964 Here's a picture of Thurber T. Lord. Both he and his wife Dahlia are deceased.

Nancy, one of the picture posted (either John's or mine) is flipped. Using pictures from the internet, one has to take that always into account, not only that, I have seen a Ebay auction here in germany, where the book sold shows the JFK limo driving towards the TSBD (flipped frame from the Nix film I think, see attachment), yet the cover text is normaly printed. So, no fake mole here Nancy, at least not one that did switch sides. What she might say after 41 years, I can not even guess.

maybe looks a little like Marita Lorenz? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I've seen photo's of my mother from that time, and she does look like her, and my mother isn't even German (she's from Spain). I have no doubt that the "mystery" woman is Ellen Rometsch. Btw., I didn't know that there is also a modus of blackmailing named after her, the so called "Ellen Rometsch strategy". http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/ois/c...ate/stephan.htm So I think it is very likely that she has still some things to say, after 40 years of silence (one of the view known persons around JFK that did not speak). I hope she's still alive, and most probably still living in Germany (age around 67).

John, she's Ellen Rometsch. Flip your photo and compare the mark (don't know the english word) on her upper lip area with the other.

John, well who knows ? But I think it would not have ended up on Ebay but rather in his next production "the smoking nunn's" . Sorry for that bad joke, i appologize to all parties involved. I have one package of "Chocolat soup for diabetics" left. Bidding starts in the year 2525. No reserve !

Wim, she said "I think i know", that is what counts in my mind. The rest i am sure will follow once she knows if that person is realy who "she think's" it is, otherwise she wouldn't have mentioned it. And that she is appalled does not reflect bad on her,as does the fact she has not mentioned any name without knowing for sure.

Why not contact each of his previous Ebay partners, maybe someone will give you his ID. Then,when you're 100% !!! sure about his ID, let us know. Not too complicated. Debra is not 100% sure, therefore I think it is a good move she doesn't publicly speculate. Do you see it different ?

Dave, All you need to do is cut and paste your post here onto that seminar. You might find that your post ties directly to the discussion going on there right now. Please. Tim <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Tim, done ! I see, you've never had a german cold .

Here's a link to "The Key to Watergate" , a documentary that is about that "callgirl-ring theory". I haven't watched the film for over a year, but what I can remember as most revealing is, when Liddy talkes about the "alledged" murder plot ,Hunt and Liddy agreed on, against the journalist Anderson (if I remember right). http://www.nixonera.com/library/watergate.asp Thanks to Nancy for giving me the link last year.

Tim, here's a link to "The Key to Watergate" , a documentary that is about that "callgirl-ring theory". I haven't watched the film for over a year, but what I can remember as most revealing is, when Liddy talkes about the "alledged" murder plot ,Hunt and Liddy agreed on, against the journalist Anderson (if I remember right). http://www.nixonera.com/library/watergate.asp Thanks to Nancy for giving me the link last year. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> HEY YOU GUYS! THIS IS PRECISELY THE DISCUSSION CURRENTLY GOING ON IN THE SEMINAR; THE WHOLE BAY OF PIGS THING. CALL GIRL RINGS AND ALL. RIGHT NOW. THIS MAKES MY POINT AGAIN, THAT THE SEMINARS ARE DEPRIVED BY NOT ALSO BEING POSTED IN THE DEBATE FORUM. PLEASE CHECK IT OUT AND SEE HOW THESE TWO PREVIOUS POSTS BY DAVE AND TIM GRATZ WOULD FIT IN THERE AND ADD TO THE BROADER FABRIC. UNTIL AND UNLESS JOHN SIMKIN WILL AGREE TO REORGANIZE HIS REORGANIZATION, I'M DIRECTLY ASKING YOU TWO GUYS TO POST THESE ON THAT THREAD, PLEASE. Tim Carroll <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Tim, sorry I have a massive cold since last week, I haven't read too much here lately, posting I am not much anyway (LEARNER), so John can move or copy at least my little post into the appropriate thread. As soon as I feel better I will catch up with what's been posted in the seminars.

Tim, here's a link to "The Key to Watergate" , a documentary that is about that "callgirl-ring theory". I haven't watched the film for over a year, but what I can remember as most revealing is, when Liddy talkes about the "alledged" murder plot ,Hunt and Liddy agreed on, against the journalist Anderson (if I remember right). http://www.nixonera.com/library/watergate.asp Thanks to Nancy for giving me the link last year.