Dean Hagerman

To make this post, you have no comprehension whatsoever of what has been going on here. Unbelievable!

This will go down as the greatest mistake in the history of your research on JFK.

I know I said Im no longer going to post in this thread, but look what Judyth has done Jim!

How in the world could you say something like this about David?

Please Jim you can back Judyth all you want, but please dont destroy any friendships over Judyth

Im not looking for a mean spirited reply from you like you gave me last time Jim, because you know that I have and still will back you up on ANY of you're assassination theories Jim except with Judyth, her story is fake, just like James Files.

I hope you read my post with understanding instead of anger because im always on you're side, I just dont agree with whats going on in this thread

Dean

Well I tried Jim

I hope you can look back after you find out that Judyth is a fake and at least see that I tried to tell you

And the reason that you dont think I comprehend this thread is because we are looking at this thread from different angles

I have read every post, and none of them come even a little close to making me change my mind about Judyth

I posted this on Duncans forum already but might as well say it again, John Woods has provided me with many amazing assassination photos that I have never seen or been abel to get.

John is selfless and shares his awesome photo collection with other researchers

Thanks John

This will go down as the greatest mistake in the history of your research on JFK.

I know I said Im no longer going to post in this thread, but look what Judyth has done Jim!

How in the world could you say something like this about David?

Please Jim you can back Judyth all you want, but please dont destroy any friendships over Judyth

Im not looking for a mean spirited reply from you like you gave me last time Jim, because you know that I have and still will back you up on ANY of you're assassination theories Jim except with Judyth, her story is fake, just like James Files.

I hope you read my post with understanding instead of anger because im always on you're side, I just dont agree with whats going on in this thread

Dean

John,

I believe this might be what you just described, and what Karl is looking for in the Z film.

http://98.155.2.255:8400/18B91/LAMPPOST.gif

I'm tilting the camera ever so slightly as I'm panning.

The lamp-post is slowly becoming more vertical, up to and past a plumb position.

Notice the openings in the brick wall "behind the top of the lamp-post" start to appear as my camera position changes.

chris

Thats an awesome GIF Chris!

For some reason I can not save it to my computer and keep getting an error message

Not to put too fine a point on it, but have you actually read the last eight posts?

Wow

Im not posting in this thread anymore

JUDYTH REPLIES:

I was asked in 1960 to write a letter 'to President Kennedy'—that's what it says in an

unauthorized book that I did not get a chance to do a final correction on. It had even

been repeated from an earlier book. I take responsibility for the "President Kennedy'

part. What happened is that I was asked to write a letter to THE PRESIDENT by some

military officers and others. They said it was necessary, for some reason. I forgot to

write the letter until early in 1961, when, looking over loose ends, my mentor, Col.

Doyle, realized I had never written the letter. I wrote it and got a nice reply from JFK's

personal assistant, Ralph Dungan. The letter has some underlinings in it, and was found

in archives by researcher Tony Marsh. Enclosures included Peace Corps materials and

other materials. So decades later, I said I'd been asked to write 'to President Kennedy'

in 1960—and several 'researchers' jumped all over me for it. For the most part, I've

done a prety good job remembering details, but we're all human, and there may be

another error here and there. Just for fun, try to remember what important letters

YOU wrote decades ago![/b]

Well all I keep hearing is how Judyth is super smart and remembers the dates and details of everything

Looks to me like Barb uncovered some facts that Judyth tried to lie about

How many times does this have to happen (Judyth being wrong, or caught in a lie) before others are able to see through her false stories?

Roswell.....hmmmmmm......could it be.........?

The longer this thread continuous the more my respect for JVB grows. She is like Kasparow playing chess against Barb, J. Simkin, Jack W., Lifton, Roy, G. Viklund etc. simultaneously...and she wins.

Am I reading a different thread then everybody else?

I keep reading that Judyth is right four times in a row over Jack, and that Judyth keeps proving everyone wrong about every matter and she knows more about LHO then all of us combined 500 times over

This is gone to far

All I see is Judyth backtracking with silly excuses everytime she is called on one of her crazy stories

From where im sitting she has not been right about anything

I cant believe the things I am seeing in this thread!

Judyth has proved nobody wrong in this thread, all of these posts by Judyth are her make-believe stories posted against the research of those who are not lying about what they have found

So how can Judyth be proving anyone wrong with false stories?

JUDYTH DISCUSSES "THE HEIGHT OF THE LIBRARY" QUESTION

NOTE: Why am I not surprised that Barb would post something completely

irrelevant to distract attention from the blockbuster post I have just made

about the "missing tooth"? Even Dean Hagerman piles on with the usual

suspects, who salivate over the very prospect that Judyth might have a

lapse regarding some detail or other. That Judyth is offering substantial,

detailed information about Lee's "missing tooth"--which she obviously did

not read in any books, as Jack likes to maintain--is given short shrift with

this crowd, whose bias oozes from their every pore. What astonishes me

is not that she may occasionally have some detail wrong, but how much

she has to tell us about crucial issues that comes from no other source.

This is extraordinarily strong evidence that she is indeed "the real deal".

This post, by the way, was sent to me on March 15 independent of this.

From the extract from a thread started by Martin Shackelford back on

15 May 2008, Judyth mistakenly described the library as having five

floors when it only had three. That is the sum and substance of what

Dean Hagerman has asked, "What is she going to say to get out of this

one?" The answer appears to be that the library was under construction

at the time and she did not explore the whole structure and therefore

she made a mistake in attributing to the building the wrong number of

floors! So the answer to Dean's breathless question is, Judyth made a

trivial mistake! What I think is more relevant is why Barb Junkkarinen

held this back until we had a blockbuster about Lee's "missing tooth"?

Jim

To me this was not a "mistake" it was Judyth trying to make up a story as to make it look like she has never done any research or read any books on the assassination/LHO

When she was called on her story by Barb I wanted to see what Judyth would come up with

My post has no evil intentions and I am not jumping on any bandwagon

I have never believed Judyth

And unless I see some amazing proof from Judyth I will continue to not believe her story

I will be the first to say I was wrong if Judyth or you can prove to me that Judyth and LHO were lovers

So far I have not been impressed because I know what books Judyth could have read back before her apperance on TMWKK that would have gave her the information she needed to fake her story

This is my opinion Jim, I am not saying that I am right and Judyth is wrong

Trust me Jim, you know I will always be on you're side no matter what you believe about Judyth

The most important thing to me is Z-film (and other film/photo) alteration and has been since 1997

Prove my opinion wrong and I will admit that I was wrong right away

Dean

Thanks Robin.

For anyone having difficulty seeing the face, I've created an outline of the Oswald face, with a bit of " Artist's Licence " for the bottom of the face which is hidden.

Wow!

Great job on this study Duncan

Very cool

Have you taken another look at the snipers nest in Bronson when he is filming the seizure before the assassination?

I posted:

Direct quotes from a named person at the library who worked there at the time of the construction, and still works there.

I posted the link to the library site that includes the story of the construction, the floor plan of the library.

And the librarian I spoke to and the info on the library site make it clear that the library is, was and always has been THREE floors ... and that at least one of their two elevators was always working during that year of construction.

Wow, very nice Barb!

I really want to hear Judyth's reply to this

What is she going to say to get out of this one?

I can see the outline of a human shape

As far as a familar face can you expand on that Duncan

Jim

Please think about this for a second

Is it really worth it to you to put a wedge in your friendships with Jack White and David Lifton, two guys who have worked with you on the Z-film and many other things for over 10+ years, two guys who back you up and have the same theories as you over Judyth whom you have been talking with for a very short period of time?

It really hurts me to see you guys trading words over Judyth who is sitting at home right now laughing her butt off over the fact that she is turning fellow researchers against each other.

Please Jim take a step back and look at whats going on.

I hate this thread, I hate the fact that Judyth has done this, I know she is very happy that she has you against Jack and David two researchers who dont believe her story

I hope you dont take my post the wrong way Jim because im behind you no matter what, im also behind Jack and David no matter what

Dean

Welcome to the forum Mark

Like many others have already said RTJ was one of the first books I read on the assassination

As you were one of the original researchers I looked up to you as a kid, and as many years have gone by I still look up to you

I very happy you have become a member of the forum

Dean Hagerman

seen it michael nothing to show but disrespect..b

I agree with Bernice

Its garbage

Hey Dean,

Pay for the shipping and I'll lend you my copy.

Greg thank you so much for your kind offer but I would like to own the book

If that means paying $70.00 from The Last Hurrah then I will do that because I know how important this book is and I should have bought it when it came out but I kept slacking while the price kept rising

Im glad I didnt do that with all the other books I own that are now sell for top dollar

I guess I will have to sleep on the couch for a night

Its worth it

John Armstrong emailed me that he would like to join the forum,

but that when he tried to sign up, he got a message that the forum

is no longer accepting members.

What is going on?

John wants to correct some misconceptions about Harvey&Lee which

are being posted by people who have not read the book. Why is he

not allowed to join?

Jack

As you've probably noticed, new members are still being accepted. (Greg Burnham, Doug Weldon, and Martin Hay are all new members.) If you send Armstrong's email address to John Simkin, I suspect there'll be no problem.

I was about to post the same response, then suspected that I wouldn't be telling Jack White anything he didn't already know. It seems clear he opted for his approach for a reason.

I've always respected John Armstrong for his efforts. I've loaned and given away numerous copies of Harvey & Lee to my friends.

Michael I wish I was your friend that you would give away a copy of Harvey & Lee too, because my wife would kill me if I drop another $100.00 on a book

Does this sound like " an author who respects genuine data"?

It sure sounds like it to me, comparing Lifton's research to Pamela's research is like comparing a Porsche to a Yugo

RIP Ed Hoffmann

Dean, please stop acting as a de facto conduit for Peter. He has been banned. if you have something to add yourself please go ahead, but that does not include spamming this forum.

Thats real fair Stephen

So its ok for members to post Gary Macks thoughts but its not ok for me to post Peters?

Dean,

I remember how pleased you were to be admitted to our company, here at this forum, just a few short months ago.

Could you ever imagine that you would, so soon, show so little respect for your fellow members here, and so little value for your posting privileges, by posting threats and insults under your name, on behalf of another?

I still am pleased to be a member

I am not pleased at how Peter was treated and believe he should have a voice against those who are trying to smear his name

I wont post anything else then as I do not wish to cause problems or break any "rules"

But I think Peter should have a voice when other members are allowed to post smear comments about him (And im sure you know what posts im talking about)

Dean, please stop acting as a de facto conduit for Peter. He has been banned. if you have something to add yourself please go ahead, but that does not include spamming this forum.

Thats real fair Stephen

So its ok for members to post Gary Macks thoughts but its not ok for me to post Peters?

Lastly, if legal action is going to, in the end, have to be taken I'll hold the Forum and perhaps some members liable for continuing to allow and/or post personal and private details of my life - often totally false or spun to make partial fact into totally misleading lies - as with that of Dunn's latest. Are there not Forum rules about keeping private information about a person off the Forum. I insist Mr, Dunn's slanderous and 99% false post be removed or will be added to the other libel and defamation. Disgusting people there with no morality; not sense of fair play; only loving to kick a person when they are down if they don't like their politics - more 'beat the victim' mentality, so common there. You further trying to discredit, slander, lie about and libel me - as well as give out details of my life that are private - should all be ashamed of yourselves; but have not enough morality to be. Mr. Dunn is a hateful and despicable xxxx. Remove his post! Of post where everyone works/worked and any other personal details about every member. Where will it end? Sick site full of sick hateful people, with a few exceptions.

Peter Lemkin

What a bunch of lies and damn lies - and how unfair to talk about me when my voice is silenced there and I can't defend myself easily - and this was even so before much of this broke - the refusal of JS to see the evidence or respond to my email that AW was setting me up - still have it JS - add to that AWs first allegation and "thinking like a Nazi, dangerous, unstable, boilingly mad" PM - followed by one warning me NOT to talk about the matter [i.e. you are not allowed to clear your name of the false charges - publicly or privately - you are simply guilty]!

Colby's points are garbage [with the small exception of his call for all the posts to be restored]. Cigdem had multiple emails or PMs from multiple men to which she objected. Can prove that. NONE OF MINE were objectionable. The one cited I have reviewed and it was harmless and even followed by a friendly reply from her. NONE were via PMs - ALL were done by email outside the Forum - so IMO never a matter of Forum business. JS is correct in only one thing. They never saw the evidence - but AW didn't care - those he hates are presumed guilty until executed - no evidence needed, nor trial, nor defense - summary execution. Shame on JS for going along to get along - and now lying. I do NOT know, but can only guess that some weeks after the alleged [and NON] offensive email [not PM], Cigdem had in the meantime [unknown to me] been contacted by several unwanted men, and some of those emails or PMs were highly objectionable to her. For whatever reason or by whatever psychological mechanism she complained about all of them throwing me in, or just me - I don't know...but I do know one thing. The tone on the short extract you saw was the same friendly tone throughout as I can prove....

Interesting how all those who keep on looking for hidden clues to challange my stating the truth - or even Cigdem's saying it was a mistake and misunderstanding are longstanding political adversaries...it says it all!! J.S.s last post only tries to make me look worse to defend himself. He admits they never saw the email [not PM] nor knew of the context - a long friendly, and for a short time, mutually flirtatious exchange over many months. I never sent her a PM - our mutual friendly exchange [even including ones friendly by her beyond the so-called offensive email WHICH I HOLD] were consistent. A final angry and very strange surprise (to me) email said to stop writing - which I did. It think it has more to do with what other persons had emailed / PMd her and not with me.

However, this all PURPOSEFULLY avoids the real issues.....NO REASONS for ANY of the actions done against me....lies inserted.....timing reversed to CYA there - making my reactions the 'reason' for your [at an earlier time] action against me - and thus the rationale for the new punishments after. Post facto invented creations to hide the misdeeds, lies and set-up! Shame on the EF and its Administrators! Walker wanted me out at all/any cost - any excuse or provocation, in which he tried many times, and were used. Who is next who speaks without fear and with conviction on a matter not on the 'approved' list of topics of AW hates for speaking of a conpiracy after the death of Caesar - or was that only a 'conspiracy theory too Mr. Walker? More later. Peter Lemkin

To all,

A few of my friends have alerted me that Maggie Hansen/Magda Hassan or whatever her name is has mentioned my name on the DPF a couple of times

in the thread about Peter Lemkin's removal.

Therefore, I am now going to mention some important points concerning the issue since Maggie/Magda carefully edited them out in her post. (Surprise surprise!!).

1. It was Peter who contacted me about the recent problems he was having on the Education Forum, not the other way around.

2. It was Peter who apologized to me (in his emails dated 10.03.2010 and 11.03.2010), repeatedly, about the email he sent me several months ago that read "cyber sex" in the subject line.

3. He was also the one who emailed me and told me that the message in question was meant to be a joke, and he did that not after he sent it to me but after the issue was brought up here on the EF by Jack White.

4. It was also Peter himself who asked me to contact the admins and tell them there had been a misunderstanding.

5. The claim that he was removed because of a complaint I made months ago is ridiculous. If that were the case, he would have been removed long ago.

Having said that, the people (either here or on the DPF) who have been desperately hunting down a scapegoat can look elsewhere and stop bothering me. Or better, mind their own business.

Edited to add : I also sent a copy of this message to Maggie/Magda and asked her to post it on the DPF for me. I'm not keeping my hopes high, though.

I dont believe anything you say

fanboy

Sure Craig

Im a fanboy in your eyes because I support Peter and you dont like Peter

Peter cares about the truth in the JFK assassination

Something that you dont care about