Jump to content
The Education Forum

Edward T. Haslam: Dr. Mary’s Monkey


Recommended Posts

The book is worth reading about Mary Sherman but goes rapidly downhill with the arrival of Judyth Vary Baker.

John Simkin,

I find it remarkable that you, especially as the head moderator of this prominent JFK debate forum, elect to ignore my question, instead chose to post such an unsubstantiated and subjective remark. Would it not be prudent to add that it is your own personal opinion? It is certainly not the opinion of the author of the book and many others, nor is it mine.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I get the impression that you don't recommend the book as much as when you started the thread. Moreover, as the author of the book, I would be puzzled as to whether you started the thread as a compliment or as an attack on his work.

Here is my question again:

Now, could you tell me, John, do you at least accept that Judyth was a promising scientist in cancer research and worked in the same company as Lee Harvey Oswald in 1963?

Wim

PS: By the way, all that Ed has to say about Judyth Baker is right here:

http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=-678503303319704937

And don't forget that other witness:

http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=-2140352666545542746

Holy sh@t! Where's that 5 star rating coming from? Oh well, maybe those video watchers don't have brains.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Wim,

Sometimes it doesn't take much to get 5 stars:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest David Guyatt
Has anyone been able to factually demonstrate that Judyth Baker's testimony is incorrect, slanted or false?

No, but that doesn't matter. Many "researchers" believe they have factually demonstrated that the Warren Commission was incorrect, but they have a problem accepting the self-evident alternatives, if those conflict with their own cultivated theories, embraced and groomed for years.

Wim

"...but they have a problem accepting the self-evident alternatives, if those conflict with their own cultivated theories, embraced and groomed for years."

Yea, especially those who swollow the stories of James Files, Chauncey Holt and Judyth V. Baker, hook, line and sinker. - BK

Which goes a long way in favour of Judyth Baker's testimony being legitimate imo, as I am sure that were there weaknesses evident they would have been raised here.

In general it is my view that cherished theories should always be open to modification/reassessment when new evidence appears, as otherwise they simply stagnate/crumble over a extended period of time, which benefits no one.

David, are you serious?

Yea, JVB modifies her theories all right. Everytime she is shown to be incompatable with reality.

Please read the sane and sober revew of this book in Lobster by Robin Ramsey

http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/ .

Or even this pro JVB piece in DPE, which thankfully doesn't have the critical standards as Lobster or we'd never be able to read it, because it puts things in a chronological perspective that shows you the absurdity of her whole story.

And has anyone ever heard of John Delane Williams and Kelly Thomas Cousins. Are they new players?

Posted at Mary Ferrell:

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...sPageId=1191673

Have you even looked at JVB's story?

First she says she met LHO in Cancoon, a decade before the city even existed.

Then she says she went to the movies with LHO to see From Russia With Love, which didn't premier in USA until 1964, and then changed her mind and blamed the translator when she was informed they conflicted with reality.

JVB's story is a beautiful love story, but it doesn't give us any information that will help us in understanding the assassination or lead to additional evidence or believable witnesses.

BK

Bill, I actually found her story believable, yes. But no I have not researched it other than having just read Edward Haslam's book. Haslam struck me as an earnest investigator throughout. Hence my earlier question about her story standing up. It was an earnest question and a shame that no one saw fit to step in at that point, I would say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a specialist on David Ferrie who is seriously interested in separating fact from fiction, let me give an opinion. But bear in mind that my impressions of the book come from Haslam's first edition.

In my opinion, Haslam treats Ferrie very superficially and repeats information about him that I believe to be erroneous. I see a pattern emerge in his first edition: He posits a (loaded) question about Ferrie; a few pages later, this hardens into a strong possibility; still a few pages later, it becomes a fact, which leads to OTHER questions which become possibilities, then facts.

It is true that Ferrie was interested in medicine at one time, and that he kept some white mice, claiming they were for cancer research in his Vinet Avenue apartment IN 1957: Six years and three residences earlier. I believe Jim Garrison's claim that Ferrie had mice in 1967 at Louisiana Avenue Parkway was a misunderstanding of something one of his aides told him. There were no such mice there at the time of Ferrie's death. Of the many Ferrie associates and friends I have interviewed, I can find NONE who recollect him ever having mice on Louisiana Avenue Parkway, having a laboratory in his apartment or associating with Dr. Sherman. I know others who have investigated Sherman's life and death, and they are likewise unable to uncover any reliable infomation that she worked with Ferrie. I can't guarantee that he had no mice/lab/relationship with Sherman, but the available evidence falls far of short proving he did. I tried to communicate this to Haslam, but to no avail.

Maybe he's on to something, maybe not. I must caution people to regard his book with caution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a specialist on David Ferrie who is seriously interested in separating fact from fiction, let me give an opinion. But bear in mind that my impressions of the book come from Haslam's first edition.

In my opinion, Haslam treats Ferrie very superficially and repeats information about him that I believe to be erroneous. I see a pattern emerge in his first edition: He posits a (loaded) question about Ferrie; a few pages later, this hardens into a strong possibility; still a few pages later, it becomes a fact, which leads to OTHER questions which become possibilities, then facts.

It is true that Ferrie was interested in medicine at one time, and that he kept some white mice, claiming they were for cancer research in his Vinet Avenue apartment IN 1957: Six years and three residences earlier. I believe Jim Garrison's claim that Ferrie had mice in 1967 at Louisiana Avenue Parkway was a misunderstanding of something one of his aides told him. There were no such mice there at the time of Ferrie's death. Of the many Ferrie associates and friends I have interviewed, I can find NONE who recollect him ever having mice on Louisiana Avenue Parkway, having a laboratory in his apartment or associating with Dr. Sherman. I know others who have investigated Sherman's life and death, and they are likewise unable to uncover any reliable infomation that she worked with Ferrie. I can't guarantee that he had no mice/lab/relationship with Sherman, but the available evidence falls far of short proving he did. I tried to communicate this to Haslam, but to no avail.

Maybe he's on to something, maybe not. I must caution people to regard his book with caution.

Thank you Stephen, and I believe Ferrie and Sherman didn't work together in research, that Ferrie didn't have caged mice in his apartment, and armed with those two fact, read John Delane William's summary of JVB's story and how it jivs with Haslam in DPE (Vol. 2, #1).

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...sPageId=1191673

The Chronology, as it is suppose to do, shows how absurd JVB's story is.

I just can't see LHO playing Twiddleywinks with Dr. Oschner, as they ran in different social circles. And most curious is the allegation that Haslam knew a different Judth V. Baker in the 70s, so now we have two Oswalds and two Judyth Bakers.

What is the purpose of the charade?

Which one do you follow?

There is also the problem that Dr. Mary Sherman really was murdered, a crime that remains unsolved.

I also stand corrected in that JMBII (or is she the first) doesn't lead to any new witnesses or evidence in that she does name Col. Philip Doyle (at Walter Reed Inst.), Dr. Harold Diehl, Dr. Canute Michaelson (geneticist, radio bio.) and Dr. George Moore (Roswell Park Inst., Buffalo, NY), who the MKULTRANS can run down if they want, though feedback would be appreciated if you come up with anything.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The photograph below was taken in Ferrie's apartment at the time of his death. Hardly a laboratory.

FWIW.

James

Hey James - if we credit Baker, then the majority of any lab related work took place in rude conditions in the kitchen. Personally, I found that image very interesting.

- lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe he's on to something, maybe not. I must caution people to regard his book with caution.

Since your view of Ferrie is so narrow you refuse to see any connections of him to LHO or anyone else involved in the assassination, perhaps it is we who should be cautious about what you have to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe he's on to something, maybe not. I must caution people to regard his book with caution.

Since your view of Ferrie is so narrow you refuse to see any connections of him to LHO or anyone else involved in the assassination, perhaps it is we who should be cautious about what you have to say.

Wait a minute Pam,

Did Steven say that he doesn't see any connections between Ferrie and LHO?

That's certainly not the case, as we have at least one photo of them together and multiple witnesses who place them together both during the CAP days and the Summer of '63.

I thought Steven said that he found no research associations between Ferrie and Mary Sherman and that Ferrie had no caged mice in his apartment.

I don't mean to jump in front of Steven here, but I too would dissagree with the narrow view of Ferrie that ignores his known associations with LHO.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The photograph below was taken in Ferrie's apartment at the time of his death. Hardly a laboratory.

FWIW.

James

Thanks James. Not a laboratory, granted, but a very unusual apartment! Blackboard with graphs and equations....microscope and other biological equiptment - if not 'laboratory' grade. Very strange - as was the man. [would love to know the books on the shelf and other contents of the flat.]

Peter,

I can tell you some of the titles of the books contained on the shelf but not all -

"Muzzey" by James G. Biaine

"Meet General Grant" by W.E. Woodward

"The Ciano Diaries"

Also, the book "Inquest" by Edward Jay Epstein was laid open on a chair.

Cheers,

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that Ed Haslam's book has much of interest in it to ponder and be explored further. I'm sorry he has chosen to no longer participate on the Forum - apparently about the JVB matter and attacks. I sense there is something not yet fully pieced-toether with Oshner and some of his fellow-researchers/doctors; Ferrie and those in his circle; Oswald and/or one of the 'Oswalds'; and possibly even JVB [as a real player, or as a spoiler]. Too many coincidences [sic] to ignore in this mix, IMO. I don't think the picture is at all clear - but much needing further exploration. We may be looking at several unconnected covert operations with some overlap of persons involved [or manipulated to look involved] - or there may be some commonality of the operations or the players. Remember even covert operatives sometimes do things on their own without 'orders' from someone for something. Ferrie, for example, could have been involved in something 'black' or just interested in something he had some contact with on his own. While parts of JVBs story don't seem to be made of solid stuff - as currently presented - she has, on reliable authority, had credible threats. My question is why, if at least parts of her story are not related to fact?

A very sensible post, Peter. As with much JFK info, we see only the tips of various icebergs.

Much more is still secret than we know. If we knew EVERYTHING, we likely would find many

interconnections and many false conclusions drawn from insufficient information.

We might even find a few nuggets of truth in the mass of JVB's imaginative fantasies.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe he's on to something, maybe not. I must caution people to regard his book with caution.

Since your view of Ferrie is so narrow you refuse to see any connections of him to LHO or anyone else involved in the assassination, perhaps it is we who should be cautious about what you have to say.

How can you know how I treat those alleged connections - including some I found by interviewing people - in a book I haven't even finished yet?

But you're right in one regard. People SHOULD be cautious in reading my book. And Haslam's book. And ANY book. Jim Marrs said it in the intro to Crossfire. Don't trust this book. Find out for yourself. Sage advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did Steven say that he doesn't see any connections between Ferrie and LHO?

That's certainly not the case, as we have at least one photo of them together and multiple witnesses who place them together both during the CAP days and the Summer of '63.

I thought Steven said that he found no research associations between Ferrie and Mary Sherman and that Ferrie had no caged mice in his apartment.

I don't mean to jump in front of Steven here, but I too would dissagree with the narrow view of Ferrie that ignores his known associations with LHO.

BK

Stephen is not revealing much about Ferrie's connections, or lack of them. I guess we all have to wait for the book to find out what he really thinks. But for the time being it seems to me that based on his posts here and on aaj that he sees a squeaky-clean Ferrie who has no connections to anybody, including mice or cancer research. So far, I am finding this orientation rather flat and uninteresting, and certainly unhelpful. I would be delighted to be mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did Steven say that he doesn't see any connections between Ferrie and LHO?

That's certainly not the case, as we have at least one photo of them together and multiple witnesses who place them together both during the CAP days and the Summer of '63.

I thought Steven said that he found no research associations between Ferrie and Mary Sherman and that Ferrie had no caged mice in his apartment.

I don't mean to jump in front of Steven here, but I too would dissagree with the narrow view of Ferrie that ignores his known associations with LHO.

BK

Stephen is not revealing much about Ferrie's connections, or lack of them. I guess we all have to wait for the book to find out what he really thinks. But for the time being it seems to me that based on his posts here and on aaj that he sees a squeaky-clean Ferrie who has no connections to anybody, including mice or cancer research. So far, I am finding this orientation rather flat and uninteresting, and certainly unhelpful. I would be delighted to be mistaken.

I've been working on this on and off for more than 20 years. I've shared many things with many researchers and a bunch of stuff on the Internet. I have to keep at least a few things for the book.

I present all the allegations about a Ferrie-Oswald relationship in great detail. Most are presented in a "let the reader decide" fashion. In a few cases (4, off the top of my head) I argue against them because I've had personal followup and think the source is crazy. But this is NOT an assassination book; it is a biography. I would be remiss if I did not note that Ferrie agreed almost from the beginning that he served in the same CAP unit as Oswald, but vehemently denied having a relationship with him in 1963, and he twice offered to take a polygraph and "truth serum." (And that none of his acknowledged friends knew of any Ferrie-Oswald relationship at that time.) Approaching it from a historian's perspective, I feel compelled to acknowledge and consider Ferrie's own assertions. But I don't draw conclusions in the book.

I acknowledge that Pamela McElwain-Brown (who is admittedly in touch with Baker) feels that there is a POSSIBILITY that Ferrie had a lab and white mice in 1963 in his apartment on Louisiana Avenue Parkway. As Haslam actually presents no evidence to prove this, I have tried to verify it by other sources (friends, landlord, pictures, documents and other sources) but have thus far been unable to prove it. And in fact, there are quite a few who assert that there were no mice or labs there at that time.

It may well be that a cautious historical approach is "flat and uninteresting," but it's important to get a detailed and verifable picture of Ferrie on the record. I suspect that people on "all sides" of the issue will find new material of interest in my book.

We get hung up on this mice/laboratory thing sometimes. All I'm saying is that the allegations are VERY hard to pin down, and I have not been able to verify it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...