Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[Jack White]

Jim...my source was an email yesterday from Adele...not some "unreliable source."

She recounted several impressions after reading for the first time this entire lengthy thread.

One of her strongest impressions was that she had never seen and did not write the email

to Judyth which is totally at odds with Adele's writing style. It used "girl-talk" words and

phrases that she is certain she would never use in an email even to close friends, such

as sending a big "internet hug" to a total stranger she had never met.

If you have read many emails or postings by Adele, you KNOW that she is a serious,

no-nonsense lady with a strong academic background whose writings are scholarly

and logical. She is not given to gushy girl-talk like the email portrays. She is intensely

interested in the strange personal mystery of her interaction with Col. Jose Rivera. She

was not interested in Judyth until in a 3-hour phone conversation the name of Rivera

was inserted. THEN she became all ears for any clue...until Judyth replied to a question

about the color of his skin. When JVB gave the WRONG ANSWER, Adele decided she

was lying about Rivera.

I do not know what "unreliable source" you refer to. My source was Adele. My only

suspect for the forgery is a certain Dutch fellow.

Jack

Jack,

My understanding is that there were other parties who had contemporaneous knowledge of these events. I

am very concerned that you are using someone who may actually be an unreliable source. Could someone

have sent an email in her name where Judyth and Adele are both right in their impressions? The efforts to

discredit Judyth are long-standing and have assumed many forms. Nothing would surprise me. I pesonally

do not know enough about Adele's allegation to make any stronger response on my own. So I am sending

this to Judyth and others to insure that those who know this situation the best reply as may be appropriate.

Jim

Only today did Adele get to the "email from Adele" which Judyth alleges that Adele wrote jointly to her and

Mary Ferrell.

Adele denounces it as a forgery!

She says she has never seen it before and the writing style is not hers by a long shot. Even with close friends

she would not use the words or phrases shown in purple. She had never met Judyth, and in their first conversation

she decided that Judyth was a phony.

.............

I wrote to Adele only one time, and she was thrilled to hear from me. Here is her letter to Mary Ferrell and to me:

[Karl Kinaski]

deleted by KK

Edited May 24, 2010 by Karl Kinaski

[Barb Junkkarinen]

The phrase is not in common currency, so it would be unsurprising were he

to simply say "circumcised" when it was a partial but not a complete one. I

can't see this issue carrying any weight at all when partial circumcision fits.

Your assumptions of what Rose would or would not have said aside, whether or not Oswald was circumcised

is not the issue when it comes to evaluating Judyth's veracity on this issue. The only salient point where

Judyth is concerned is that in 2000 she wrote in an email that LHO was not circumcised, but nine years later,

in an email in 2009, she wrote that he was circumcised ... and referred to the autopsy finding herself.

Whether or not you acknowledge it, that is a huge problem for Judyth.

Edited May 24, 2010 by Barb Junkkarinen

[John Dolva]

Jack, get someone to look at the email embedded data.

___

FWIWSome hopefully not off topic thoughts. Some of the dates of events are a bit odd from a perspective (I've for some time thought 53 a significant year) of Raten Lines to South America and the absorption of Ratens into the US in various ways. Such things as just a new ID, sometimes a face job, sometimes an assumed identity again pointing at a WWII related intelligence operation that diverged when the Soviets acquired full nuclear capability. The family names have a kind of french flavour, but thats just my impression from long ago memories.

[Barb Junkkarinen]

Jack,

Does Adele recall *ever* having written an email to Judyth on which she may have cc'd Mary,

and in which she gave Mary and Judyth her snail mail instructions?? Or is it just the "gushy girl-talk"

parts she says she did not write?

I just want to be sure I have this straight.

Thanks,

Barb :-)

Jim...my source was an email yesterday from Adele...not some "unreliable source."

She recounted several impressions after reading for the first time this entire lengthy thread.

One of her strongest impressions was that she had never seen and did not write the email

to Judyth which is totally at odds with Adele's writing style. It used "girl-talk" words and

phrases that she is certain she would never use in an email even to close friends, such

as sending a big "internet hug" to a total stranger she had never met.

If you have read many emails or postings by Adele, you KNOW that she is a serious,

no-nonsense lady with a strong academic background whose writings are scholarly

and logical. She is not given to gushy girl-talk like the email portrays. She is intensely

interested in the strange personal mystery of her interaction with Col. Jose Rivera. She

was not interested in Judyth until in a 3-hour phone conversation the name of Rivera

was inserted. THEN she became all ears for any clue...until Judyth replied to a question

about the color of his skin. When JVB gave the WRONG ANSWER, Adele decided she

was lying about Rivera.

I do not know what "unreliable source" you refer to. My source was Adele. My only

suspect for the forgery is a certain Dutch fellow.

Jack

[Pamela Brown]

Kathy C said: Does anyone else think this is a possibility? Maybe some do.

That makes no sense to me. I am still hopeful that someone who is in touch with Marina can ask her to weigh in on this.

[William Kelly]

Kathy C said: Does anyone else think this is a possibility? Maybe some do.

That makes no sense to me. I am still hopeful that someone who is in touch with Marina can ask her to weigh in on this.

Yea,

Let's get Marina and JVB on Jerry Springer!

Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!

[Pamela Brown]

Kathy C said: Does anyone else think this is a possibility? Maybe some do.

That makes no sense to me. I am still hopeful that someone who is in touch with Marina can ask her to weigh in on this.

Yea,

Let's get Marina and JVB on Jerry Springer!

Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!

I was initially thinking Oprah, but maybe you are right.

[Jack White]

She did not say. She just said the writing style was not hers and used word and phrases that she would NEVER use.

She is now monitoring this thread, and may give you an answer.

Jack

Jack,

Does Adele recall *ever* having written an email to Judyth on which she may have cc'd Mary,

and in which she gave Mary and Judyth her snail mail instructions?? Or is it just the "gushy girl-talk"

parts she says she did not write?

I just want to be sure I have this straight.

Thanks,

Barb :-)

Jim...my source was an email yesterday from Adele...not some "unreliable source."

She recounted several impressions after reading for the first time this entire lengthy thread.

One of her strongest impressions was that she had never seen and did not write the email

to Judyth which is totally at odds with Adele's writing style. It used "girl-talk" words and

phrases that she is certain she would never use in an email even to close friends, such

as sending a big "internet hug" to a total stranger she had never met.

If you have read many emails or postings by Adele, you KNOW that she is a serious,

no-nonsense lady with a strong academic background whose writings are scholarly

and logical. She is not given to gushy girl-talk like the email portrays. She is intensely

interested in the strange personal mystery of her interaction with Col. Jose Rivera. She

was not interested in Judyth until in a 3-hour phone conversation the name of Rivera

was inserted. THEN she became all ears for any clue...until Judyth replied to a question

about the color of his skin. When JVB gave the WRONG ANSWER, Adele decided she

was lying about Rivera.

I do not know what "unreliable source" you refer to. My source was Adele. My only

suspect for the forgery is a certain Dutch fellow.

Jack

[Stephen Roy]

Interview of David Franklin Lewis Jr. by Det. Louis Ivon, Orleans Parish District Attorney's Office, December 15, 1966:

Q. Approximately how many times have you seen Lee Harvey, who you later identified as Lee Harvey Oswald?

A. No more than four times, each time in the company of Carlos [later identified as Carlos C. Quiroga].

Q. The day that you first met him, were you introduced to him?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you hold conversations?

A. No, more or less "I'm glad to meet you."

[...]

Q. I am going to show you another photograph. Do you know this man?

A. This man is Lee Harvey Oswald. The man I know as Lee Harvey and the man I was introduced to in the lower portion of our building, in Mancuso Restaurant by Carlos.

[...]

Q. Have you ever seen Lee Harvey Oswald and David Ferrie together?

A. Not to my knowledge - No. They may have been, but I don't know.

[...]

Q. Is everything in this statement true and correct to the best of your knowledge?

A. That is correct.

Q. You are making this statement freely and voluntarily?

A. I am more than glad to give this statement.

[...]

Q. After leaving Banister's employment, where did you work?

A. [...] Odd jobs from April [1963] to March 1964 and reported to Louisiana Employment Office...Trailways - April 4, 1965 - Continental Trailways Freight Agent to present [December 1966].

Statement of David Franklin Lewis Jr. to Orleans Parish District Attorney's Office, December 15, 1966:

[...] In the late summer of 1963, I was reporting to the Louisiana State Employment Office, at 601 Camp Street seeking steady employment. At this time all I had was odd jobs from time to time...On one occasion I...stopped by Mancuso's Restaurant...I noticed...a fellow I was introduced to by Carlos as Lee Harvey in the restaurant. It has now been determined by me through photographs that this man was Lee Harvey Oswald...When I first seen Lee Oswald in the restaurant, he didn't talk much, but he seemed to be anxious about getting on his way...I had only seen Oswald about three or four times in the neighborhood of Lafayette and Camp Streets in the Newman Building...

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT ADELE EDISEN (WITH MORE TO COME)

Dean Hartwell, who has impressed me more with the clarity and logic of his

reasoning about Judyth than anyone else on this thread, has sent me a nice

observation about some of the tactics used by her critics during this exchange:

Assertion #1 - JVB said something that contradicts what another person said.

Assertion #2 - The other person has more credibility than JVB

Assertion #3 - Therefore, the other person is telling the truth and JVB is lying

Assertion #4 - Because JVB is lying here, she is lying about everything else.

Exception: If JVB admits to doing something wrong or expresses regrets over

past action (i.e. prisoner lost life), she is telling the truth and is a murderer.

Since none of these matters can be known with certainly, especially about the

motives and beliefs that may inspire other parties to become involved here, I

would substitute "Probably" for "Therefore" to denote an uncertain inference:

Assertion #1 - JVB said something that contradicts what another person said.

Assertion #2 - The other person has more credibility than JVB

Assertion #3 - Probably, the other person is telling the truth and JVB is lying

Assertion #4 - Because JVB is lying here, she is lying about everything else.

I suppose that Dean's principal point is that the inference from #3 to #4 is not

justifiable, but there are other aspects involved, including that reasoning from

#1 and #2 to #3 is also unwarranted. More sophistication is required here.

Being wrong or to make assertions that turn out to be false is not the same

thing as lying. Lies are special cases that require (i) saying something false,

(ii) knowing it is false, but (iii) saying it anyway with (iv) the motive to mislead.

Assertion #2 involves rendering judgments of relative degrees of credibility,

of course, which tend to be rather subjective. For those, like me, who have

considerable confidence in Judyth's credibility, it can work the other way around:

Assertion #1 - Another person said something that contradicts what Judyth said.

Assertion #2 - JVB has more credibility than the other person

Assertion #3 - Probably, Judyth is telling the truth and the other party is wrong.

Assertion #4 - Since the other party is wrong here, they are wrong elsewhere.

When you put it this way, that the inference from #3 to #4 is unwarranted now

become rather striking. Yet it is commonly held against Judyth, no matter why

she might have been wrong, if, indeed, she is wrong. That is still a question.

The case of Adele Edisen is a case in point. Jack assumes Judyth was wrong

about Rivera's skin color. But he is brown, not black, where those who are not

black are commonly described as "white" because he is not of African origin.

Jack, of course, is willing to believe anything negative about Judyth and never

acknowledges anything positive. This is one of those cases. Why should he,

or anyone else, not accept this distinction as it applies to Rivera's skin color?

Even more interestingly, why would anyone think that Judyth would fake an

email? That is about as ridiculous as anything I can imagine, since it could

be so easily exposed. And what is the purported basis for alleging fakery?

Because Adele said she would not use the phrase, "a big internet hug"? Who

knows the precisely words that one might use on on unusual occasion? What

GOOD REASON is there to believe that Adele is right and Judyth is wrong here?

We all make mistakes. Adele could sincerely believe that she did not use the

phrase, "a big internet hug", and yet she might have used it on that occasion.

What we need in these cases is independent evidence concerning who is right.

Another possibility is that someone could have altered the email to create a

tempest in a teapot. What possible motive, for example, would Judyth have

had to have changed an email from Adele? What would have been the point?

A friend, who is more familiar with Adele's writing style than am I, has told me

that she, too, does not find this to be typical of writing by Adele and that, in her

opinion, someone may have written a fake email using Adele's email account.

She has also observe that the email servers for Adele and for Mary Ferrell are

the same, which suggests the possibility that someone might have been able

to access them both via swbell.com: aedisen@swbell.net maryferr@swbell.net

The disputed email is dated 20 October 2000. It may be worth considering the

situation at that time. Which parties were most upset with Judyth? If she was

not responsible for this fakery, assuming that it is fakery, who might have been?

Surely Adele's memory is like our own memories, which is to say fallible and

uncertain. I cannot imagine any reason why Adele HAS TO BE RIGHT and why

Judyth HAS TO BE WRONG. Perhaps something was going on behind the scene.

She did not say. She just said the writing style was not hers and used word and phrases that she would NEVER use.

She is now monitoring this thread, and may give you an answer.

Jack

Jack,

Does Adele recall *ever* having written an email to Judyth on which she may have cc'd Mary,

and in which she gave Mary and Judyth her snail mail instructions?? Or is it just the "gushy girl-talk"

parts she says she did not write?

I just want to be sure I have this straight.

Thanks,

Barb :-)

Jim...my source was an email yesterday from Adele...not some "unreliable source."

She recounted several impressions after reading for the first time this entire lengthy thread.

One of her strongest impressions was that she had never seen and did not write the email

to Judyth which is totally at odds with Adele's writing style. It used "girl-talk" words and

phrases that she is certain she would never use in an email even to close friends, such

as sending a big "internet hug" to a total stranger she had never met.

If you have read many emails or postings by Adele, you KNOW that she is a serious,

no-nonsense lady with a strong academic background whose writings are scholarly

and logical. She is not given to gushy girl-talk like the email portrays. She is intensely

interested in the strange personal mystery of her interaction with Col. Jose Rivera. She

was not interested in Judyth until in a 3-hour phone conversation the name of Rivera

was inserted. THEN she became all ears for any clue...until Judyth replied to a question

about the color of his skin. When JVB gave the WRONG ANSWER, Adele decided she

was lying about Rivera.

I do not know what "unreliable source" you refer to. My source was Adele. My only

suspect for the forgery is a certain Dutch fellow.

Jack

Edited May 25, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Kathleen Collins]

Only today did Adele get to the "email from Adele" which Judyth alleges that Adele wrote jointly to her and

Mary Ferrell.

Adele denounces it as a forgery!

She says she has never seen it before and the writing style is not hers by a long shot. Even with close friends

she would not use the words or phrases shown in purple. She had never met Judyth, and in their first conversation

she decided that Judyth was a phony.

.............

I wrote to Adele only one time, and she was thrilled to hear from me. Here is her letter to Mary Ferrell and to me:

[From: aedisen@swbell.net (Adele Edisen)

To: maryferr@swbell.net

CC: ElectLady63@aol.com

AOLFAOLHÞ

+Return-Path: <aedisen@swbell.net>

Received: from rly-yd03.mx.aol.com (rly-yd03.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.3]) by air-yd04.mail.aol.com (v76_r1.8) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:02:42 -0400

Received: from mta5.rcsntx.swbell.net (mta5.rcsntx.swbell.net [151.164.30.29]) by rly-yd03.mx.aol.com (v76_r1.19) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Oct 2000 01:02:03 -0400

Received: from AEDISEN ([207.193.29.55]) by mta5.rcsntx.swbell.net

(Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9)

with SMTP id <0G2P0057XPVKM0@mta5.rcsntx.swbell.net> for ElectLady63@aol.com;

Thu, 19 Oct 2000 23:59:47 -0500 (CDT)

Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:02:34 -0400

From: Adele Edisen <aedisen@swbell.net>

Subject: Judyth's letter

To: maryferr@swbell.net

Cc: ElectLady63@aol.com

Message-id: <002101c03a4a$95282180$371dc1cf@AEDISEN>

MIME-version: 1.0

X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1

Content-type: multipart/alternative;

boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001C_01C03A29.0C9D9D20"

X-MSMail-Priority: Normal

X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3

X-Priority: 3

AOLFRS~

Dearest Mary,

I am absolutely speechless with surprise, joy, shock ... head-shaking astonishment. Some of your emails have been full of surprises, but this one takes the cake! First, I want to thank you; then, I want to ask how you are doing.

Now, on to Judyth's letter.

Dear Judyth - here's ONE GIGANTIC INTERNET HUG! Please, please write to me, call me. I must talk with you! Your incredible letter, which I read late at night, just has put my mind into a tailspin. If you send me anything by regular mail, please address it to my Postoffice Box: Adele Edisen, P.O. Box ....... San Antonio, TX ........(This is also for Mary's info because the postal service will not deliver to my house, even though I have a mailbox on the street. They tell me it's because having a P.O. Box is like a change-of-address, so after one year they assume everyone will know the Box address). My phone number is as Mary said, --- --- ----. Judyth, If you can, please call, or give me your phone number and I can call you. There are so many questions I have for you. I'm home most evenings after 6:00 pm Central Time. We must talk!

I look forward to knowing you. Thank you for your words of encouragement.

–Adele

Even to close friends Adele would not write ONE GIGANTIC INTERNET HUG!

What I remember about Adele from Rich's Forum -- she was a dignified woman. I cannot believe she wrote the email above. I guess you would describe it as "gushing" and it's full of baloney.

Kathy C

[Kathleen Collins]

The phrase is not in common currency, so it would be unsurprising were he

to simply say "circumcised" when it was a partial but not a complete one. I

can't see this issue carrying any weight at all when partial circumcision fits.

But Jim... Dr. Rose's autopsy report said circumcised, not partially circumcised.

Are you saying he was mistaken? There would be a noticeable difference.

Jack

Most of Judyth's critics don't even use the internet for research. BULL----! I suggested some time back to enter, "circumcision, partial", to check this out. I found several articles about it. If Jack White could look at the Oswald autopsy photographs and say that, in his opinion, he appeared to be uncircumcised, yet the autopsy report says he was, it looks to me as though the evidence supports the conclusion that he had a PARTIAL CIRCUMCISION. What other hypothesis can explain more of the available evidence? That is applying logic to the data, which appears to be too much to expect from most of you on this thread. Here's one link: http://www.askmen.com/dating/dzimmer_100/1...ve_answers.html

The Final Cut

A doctor told me that I do not need to be circumcised if I can pull back the foreskin on my penis without any problems. I can do this, however, I do believe that I have an excess of foreskin. Is it possible to remove some of it, only like the little extra bit that is there? If so, will there be any long-term effects due to the removal of a bit of my foreskin?

Todd

Hello Todd,

Partial circumcision is a common procedure that's favored by many men as a happy medium. The removal of just the contractile tip allows the foreskin to retract upon erection, but still retain its protective quality as a natural shield for the head of the flaccid penis.

I went to the link you provided. It was a god------ sleazy website. Was that the best you could do? I couldn't get any info there because they wanted my email address to join. Why not a medical publication? Something with class and trustworthy medical knowledge. Not some lonely hearts boob talking to a teenager.

Kathy C

[Kathleen Collins]

Kathy C said: Does anyone else think this is a possibility? Maybe some do.

That makes no sense to me. I am still hopeful that someone who is in touch with Marina can ask her to weigh in on this.

Pamela, I think I didn't make my statement clearly. I was referring to there being a beam atop one of our satellites that Prof. Fetzer believed caused the WTC buildings to fall faster than free fall. It was his theory. It had nothing to do with circumcision. Sorry.

Kathy C

[Kathleen Collins]

Kathy C said: Does anyone else think this is a possibility? Maybe some do.

That makes no sense to me. I am still hopeful that someone who is in touch with Marina can ask her to weigh in on this.

Yea,

Let's get Marina and JVB on Jerry Springer!

Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!

Again, I'm sorry. I was referring to a claim by Prof. Fetzer that there was a beam attached to one of our satellites that made the WTC buildings fall faster than free fall. And I asked if anyone else believed that.

Kathy C