Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Judyth replies to Barb and to Jack about her "provisional political asylum"

Barb diverts focus. Her assignment is to 'prove' that I have lied ever since age fifteen.

Over a perod of a decade, Barb has never directly contacted me. Barb never asked to see my evidence. Barb never met me. Barb never spoke to me on the telephone.

But she is always alert to divert. Obsessed. Dedicated. Determined to discredit JVB.

Why?

1) it diverts people from the leads and information I am trying to provide.

2) IT STOPS DISCUSSION OF THE LEADS.

===What Barb wrote, and my reply====

"Martin had an unfortunate habit of running with things on Judyth's say so without checking them out. It cost him dearly."

REPLY: I told Martin what was really happening behind the scenes. Much of that was not in the official records. I described myself as being PROTECTED IN THE EU POLITICAL ASYLUM SYSTEMS. Sometimes I said protected in the system, sometimes I said protected in political asylum. It was not intended to become a lawyer's brief for Barb to pick apart, implying that I claimed I had been GRANTED same. She took the term "political asylum" and ran with it, never checking with me to see if I would have agreed with its use in that manner.

AS FOR BARB, SHE IS THE ONE WHO DID NOT DO HER HOMEWORK.

LET'S DO SOME HOMEWORK RIGHT NOW:

FIRST, I QUOTE FROM ANOTHER ASYLUM SEEKER (NOT ME):

"The first of these was to determine to which country I should go.

It could not be the United States, for this would embarrass Washington...

The immigration officers were most courteous at every point, but they

questioned me with meticulous care. Our interview required more than three hours.

Political asylum in Sweden requires formal approval at the cabinet level, hence

about one month was required to complete the certification...." (ref: A TASTE OF FREEDOM)

BARB IMPLIES I WAS TURNED DOWN BECAUSE I WAS NOT IN ANY DANGER.

HERE IS ANOTHER BIT OF HOMEWORK:

JUST A FEW MORE (THERE ARE MANY EXAMPLES):

1) A woman threatened to set herself on fire outside the County Court in central Gothenburg on Friday after she had her asylum application rejected....

2) United Nation refugee agency UNHCR has criticized Sweden's decision to deport Afghan refugees to Kabul even if they have no social or family ties in the capital city...

3) Recent decisions by Sweden to send refugees back to Baghdad and other war-ravaged areas have tarnished its reputation for welcoming victims of conflict, critics say...

4) A couple from Turkey seeking asylum in Sweden threatened to set themselves on fire in the Board of Migration's offices in Kiruna on Monday. After all-day negotiations they gave themselves up.

IT IS NOT THAT EASY TO GET POLITICAL ASYLUM IN SWEDEN. ONE IN A WHEELCHAIR WAS SENT BACK TO IRAQ, THOUGH HE HAD BEEN SHOT IN AN ATTEMPT TO KILL HIM, AND WAS PARALYZED BY THAT SHOT. A HOMOSEXUAL WAS SENT BACK TO IRAN WHERE HE WAS SURELY EXECUTED.

1) Dozens of people come daily to Sweden, seeking political asylum

2) Up to half are deported IMMEDIATELY and never enter the system

Why wasn't I immediately deported?

What people typically get deported immediately, before entering the system?

a) people from free countries, such as the United States

anyone suspected of trying to use the system for any other means except the need for self-protection

c) they must not come directly from any other Schengen Treaty country-.

NOTE: Most EU countries, including Hungary--are Schengen.

I CAME FROM HUNGARY AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN IMMEDIATELY DEPORTED TO THE HUNGARIAN POLITICAL ASYLUM SYSTEM.

I WAS NOT.

question: Since I came from Hungary, a Schengen country. WHY WASN'T I MMEDIATELTY DEPORTED BACK TO HUNGARY, TO HAVE THEM HANDLE MY REQUEST, SAVING SWEDEN A LOT OF MONEY AND INVESTIGATION TIME?

answer: I CAME WITH SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT MY LIFE WAS IN DANGER IN HUNGARY.

question: WHY WAS I NOT THEREFORE IMMEDIATELY DEPORTED TO MY HOME COUNTRY, THE UNITED STATES?

answer: I CAME WITH SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT MY LIFE WAS IN DANGER IN THE UNITED STATES.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

1) YOU ARE PLACED IN A LARGE PROCESSING BUILDING WITH DOZENS OF OTHERS, TYPICALLY FOR ONE OR TWO DAYS. In my case, so anxious were they, because I was an American, that I stayed there five days. I was then moved to a small town.

2) IF ACCEPTED INTO THE SYSTEM, YOU ARE THEN MOVED FROM THE RECEIVING COMPOUND INTO A SMALL, REMOTE TOWN AND GIVEN ALL YOU NEED, WHILE INVESTIGATIONS CONTINUE. THIS IS PROVISIONAL POLITICAL ASYLUM. THE PROVISIONS ARE: DEPENDING ON THE FIRST JUDGMENT IN YOUR CASE. YOU WILL STILL HAVE TWO EXTRA CHANCES TO APPEAL IF TURNED DOWN THE FIRST TIME.

BARB SAYS THERE IS NO PROVISIONAL ASYLUM IN SWEDEN.

BUT IF YOU PLUG IN "PROVISIONAL POLITICAL ASYLUM" ...BESIDES MY OWN, ON MY

SPACE...NOTE A FEW MORE FROM OTHER EU POLITICAL ASYLUM COUNTRIES:

MySpace Video - Suzi Q Service Dog 's Video Channel & VideoClips

<http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.channel&ContributorID=35424589>

PROVISIONAL POLITICAL ASYLUM MEANS YOU ARE PROTECTED AND HELPED WHILE THEY

LOOK INTO YOUR CASE TO SEE IF YOU CAN STAY PERMANENTLY. ATTACHED IS

MY 'FUNDS' CARD TO WHICH FUNDS ARE ADDED...USED AT THE BANK TO GET MONEY TO

LIVE ON...BUT OF COURSE, NO PERCENTAGE IS CHARGED...ALSO USED AS ID IN THE

SYSTEM.

NOTE: AT THIS TIME, BARB AND MCADAMS' PEOPLE WERE ACCUSING ME OF BEING AN

ILLEGAL ALIEN HIDING IN SWEDEN.

BARB FAILED TO MENTION THAT.

THIS IS WHY MARTIN AND PAMELA BROUGHT OUT THE INFORMATION.

YOU ARE NOT LOCKED UP. YOU GET LIVING QUARTERS, A FUNDS CARD, ETC. I HAVE

ATTACHED MINE. NOTE THE EXPIRATION DATE IS FAR BEYOND ONE MONTH. IT WAS

GOOD UNTIL JULY, 2008. I ENTERED THE SYSTEM SEPTEMBER, 2007.

result: I was not immediately deported back to Hungary.

I was not immediately deported back to the United States.

They promised to give me refuge, as they looked into the situation

more deeply. It is commonly called "provisional political asylum".

I was assigned a lawyer.

I was advised that because I was from the US, could never get

permanent political asylum.

The letter Barb refers to was an appointment letter to find out

when it would be possible for me to leave. I had already been there nine

months. I told them I needed another few weeks...my family had secured me

safe havens and we were going through paperwork.

They gave me the extra weeks.

I did not return to the US. I was never required to do so.

Furthermore, I am a welcome guest in Sweden and spent 49% of my time in that

country in a house my son purchased for my use there. Why would my family

do that, unless absolutely necessary?

I repeat: The entire effort had been cooperative, between me and the system,

to keep me as long as possible until I could get family and friends to

arrange safe places for me to live, as there was never a chance that I, a

non-combatant, age 65 at that time, and a 'free country' US citizen, could

stay 'forever'.

Barb DOES NOT KNOW THE SYSTEM. But she thinks she does and

misreports it to the world.

SHE SAYS AFTER ONE MONTH I WAS ORDERED TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY.

response:

This is true. What Barb fails to mention is that this was a routine order.

I was urged to publicize my case so that an appeal I was advised to make, to

buy me more time, would be taken seriously and would not be immediately

rejected. Such appeals do not always languish for months, as Barb has

insinuated elsewhere. A second appeal can be rejected at once.

What happened next?

1) I was given TV coverage and made an appeal to be allowed to stay in the

country. It was broadcast in Sweden on a TV station that is watched usually

only by Swedes. The appeal was then made by my assigned lawyer, and I was

asked how much time I needed. I told them until May 15. It turned out I'd

need even more time....they eventually gave me two extra months after May

15.... but had to call me in by June to officially ask me how it was all

going. That official 'letter' was to tell me I had to leave the country. I

came into the office a few weeks later and was asked how much more time

I needed. I told them I needed three more weeks. I got it.

When the official letter came, I had already been in Sweden nine months.

Barb, cuts months off in her own version. I left Sweden after ten-and-a-half

months. I was told that I was first American woman in decades to stay even

that long under the Swedish political asylum system.

I never deported or ordered to return to America. Instead, an apartment in a

non-EU nation was arranged for me by my family and children. In addition,

my son purchased a house for me in Sweeden in a very remote area. I had made

many friends in Sweden by that time, who have helped me and who call every

day to make sure I am still safe. They and my family have made great

sacrifices for my safety. It is hard to write today because my best friend

has died and I am overwhelmed with grief.

2) After the appeal was made, I was moved to a new town because my postbox

and door were both marked, and witnesses observed that I was followed and

photographed by foreigners, not Swedes. The witnesses are sensitive to

outsiders because we were all in political asylum seekers, all of us hoping

to get positives, not negatives.

They all knew I could never get a positive.

We existed under "Provisional political asylum" and were taken care of.

The Swedes not only moved me, they then gave me a fake name to use for

mail to protect me.

That did not stop Barb, McAdams, and company from hunting me down, once

they knew I was there.

By the way, BARB & CO found that obscure 4-minute TV broadcast in Swedish.

HOW? NOBODY knew a thing about it, except the Swedes...it was all in

Swedish. I was exhausted and had been terrorized by threats. I was still

walking with a cane due to an assault that occurred in the US earlier in the

year (not related to my circumstances, it was a student on drugs who hurt me

when I tried to stop her from stealing a book).

Does "provisional asylum" mean the "protection of a foreign government"? If so,

there ought to be some official documentation available.

Is she no longer under "Dankbaar asylum" in Amsterdam? What happened to

her LHO Museum there?

Why does she refuse to accept the massive 12 year documentation of John

Armstrong?

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Continuing with Barb's remarks (and more for Jack will be coming):

"The service to appear as well as the entire appeal denial docs has been

posted on the moderated group."

answer: So what? from the beginning, I was told that I could never, as a US

citizen, stay permanently. The kind Swedes let me stay ten-and-a-half

months, until my family and friends could provide safe havens for me. Try

to find ANY other American woman who was allowed into the system.

BARB GOES ON:

Martin posted the notice to appear and he and Judyth claimed it as proof she

had asylum in Sweden.

answer: Nit-picking.

Martin posted the letter to prove I had been accepted into the Swedish

political asylum SYSTEM and was NOT an illegal alien, as Barb and others

were accusing me.

BARB DOESN'T TELL YOU THAT THEY ACCUSED ME OF ILLEGALLY HIDING IN SWEDEN.

THEY IMPLIED THAT I WAS ILLEGALLY HIDING IN THE COUNTRY.

SO MARTIN POSTED THE LETTER, PROVING THAT ALL THE WHILE I HAD BEEN IN

"POLITICAL ASYLUM' - ..Not knowing the termnology as does our 'expert,'

Barb, does, he failed to say 'provisional political asylum' --a term our

'expert' Barb claims does not exist in Sweden, despite the presence of sme

14,000 people in Sweden who do not know yet if they can stay, who have been

in Sweden for months.

THOSE PEOPLE LIVE UNDER PROVISIONAL POLITICAL ASYLUM.

I SENT THE LETTER TO MARTIN AND KNEW ITS CONTENTS--ORDER TO APPEAR

CONCERNING LEAVING THE COUNTRY. THE DATE SHOWED I HAD BEEN IN THE SYSTEM

UNDER PROTECTION FOR NINE MONTHS.

BARB NEXT SAYS:

"It was easy to translate. "

But in another part of the post, you see they had some problems translating.

Guess what happened next?

They contacted a Swede in Sweden to get more information, as online you

cannot get into even public files easily....he claimed he was a 'lurker' --

a Swede, no less! on the newsgroup, though he never posted before, and after

a couple posts, never would again.

The convenient Swede "volunteered" to track me down in the records there.

YES, Barb and McAdams, neither of whom ever made a single phone call to me,

who never sent a single email to ask questions, who never met me, GOT

SOMEBODY IN SWEDEN TO REPORT ON WHAT HE COULD FIND OUT ABOUT MY CASE

AND MY PRIVATE FILES. THEY EVEN PUBLISHED MY CASE FILE NUMBER ON THE INTERNET.

FILE NUMBERS ARE SO YOUR NAME ISN'T 'OUT THERE' TO THE PUBLIC.

BUT THEY GOT MY PRIVATE FILE NUMBER AND PUBLISHED IT.

BARB GOES ON:

The whole appeal that was denied ... a Swedish gentleman got the documents

himself and spoke to the person at the Swedish immigration board.

--BEFORE IT WAS ERASED, WE READ THAT MCADAMS HIMSELF (OR SOMEBODY FOR

MCADAMS) CONTACTED THIS 'GENTLEMAN' WHO OTHERWISE REMAINS UN-NAMED.

I WAS TOLD HE WAS A TRANSLATOR IN THE SYSTEM.

MY SWEDISH FRIENDS WERE VERY UPSET, BECAUSE MY FILE NUMBER WAS NOT EASY

TO GET. .THEY COULD NOT GET IT.

I WAS TOLD MY FILE NUMBER WOULD 'ALWAYS' REMAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND THAT

ANYTHING I PUT IN THAT FILE WOULD REMAIN CONFIDENTIAL, FOREVER.

GOD KNOWS NOW WHAT HAS BEEN REMOVED.

LET'S SEE...THE MAN WHO POSTS THE INFORMATION --IT IS THE FIRST TIME HE

POSTS ON MCADAMS' NEWSGROUP. HE CLAIMS TO BE A LURKER WHO LIVES IN SWEDEN.

HE VANISHES AFTER DELIVERING HIS INFORMATION. YOU NEVER HEAR FROM THE

'GENTLEMAN' AGAIN--

HE HAS DONE HIS JOB.

So, yes, there are documents.

I can dig all that stuff out if someone is actually interested, but Judyth,

though her details are a little different than the reality of it,

--IT'S BARB'S DETAILS THAT ARE A LITTLE DIFFERENT THAN 'THE REALITY OF

IT'---

admits her appeal was denied and that she had to leave Sweden, as far as I

know.

If anyone wants any of that, e-mail me or do a google groups advanced search

for Judyth Sweden Asylum Denied as key words. This thing got split and

renamed into several threads.

--IT WAS SPLIT AND RENAMED INTO THREADS SO PEOPLE COULD NOT SEE THAT BARB,

MCADAMS, AND CO. HID THE TRUTH AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

But it all started with Pam running to her keyboard to post a little tidbit

about Judyth, that I posted earlier this evening.

PAM PUT THE TIDBIT ON THERE--RAN TO DO IT--TO STOP ACCUSATIONS THAT I WAS AN

ILLEGAL ALIEN HIDING IN SWEDEN.

GOD BLESS HER.

Later Pam announced that she could now reveal that Judyth was in Sweden.

RIGHT--TO STOP THE ACCUSATIONS THAT I WAS AN ILLEGAL ALIEN.

NEXT, THEY SAID I DID NOT GO TO MY MOTHER'S FUNERAL IN DEC. 2007 TO 'PROVE'

THAT I WAS IN SOME KIND OF DANGER, AND WAS LYING.

AS TO MY MOTHER'S DYING IN DEC. 2007, AND MY BEING UNABLE TO GO TO MY OWN

MOTHER'S FUNERAL, DUE TO THREATS AND THE INABILITY TO STAY IN PROTECTION IN

SWEDEN IF I LEFT, THIS COMMENT WAS SO CRUEL AND IDEOUS. THEY HAVE NO

FEELINGS.

HIDEOUS.

A HORRIBLE THING TO SAY ABOUT ANY HUMAN BEING, UPON THE DEATH OF

THEIR MOTHER. HOW DARE THEY.

Nobody was looking for Judyth's whereabouts ....

==NOT SO. WE HAVE SAVED POSTS SHOWING THAT THEY COULD NOT FIND ME AND WERE

ASKING AROUND====

but with Pam's announcement of Judyth getting asylum,

==PAMELA SAID I HAD POLITICAL ASYLUM...GEE, SORRY IT DID NOT SAY

PROVISIONAL, ETC. PAM LATER CORRECTED THAT, WHICH THEY SAID DID NOT EXIST.

I HAD TOLD PAM AND SHACK THAT I COULD NOT STAY THERE FOREVER. WE DIDN'T

REALIZE WE WOULD HAVE NIT-PICKING GOING ON, AD NAUSEUM.

BARB DOES NOT GO ON TO TELL THE READERS THAT I WAS LEGALLY ALLOWED TO APPEAL

FOR A THIRD TIME AND COULD HAVE STAYED POSSIBLY UP TO A YEAR OR TWO LONGER.

BUT I HAD OBTAINED SAFE HAVEN AND DD NOT WANT TO BE A PARASITE ON THE

SYSTEM. I LEFT, THOUGH I COULD HAVE LODGED A THIRD APPEAL WHICH OF COURSE

ALSO WOULD HAVE BEEN DENIED, AS I COME FROM THE LAND OF THE FREE AND THE

HOME OF THE BRAVE.

PLEASE FORGIVE CAPS. I HAVE VISION PROBLEMS.

hey, there was a new claim that sounded bizarre, so some wanted to check it

out. Didn't take long to dismantle the whole thing. And Judyth can thank Pam

for it. :-)

==NOTHING WAS DISMANTLED EXCEPT FOR BARB'S INTEGRITY AT TELLING ONLY A

PORTION OF THE STORY, FROM HER OWN DISTORTED VIEWPOINT AS A PECULIAR

RESEARCHER WHO GOES TO A GREAT DEAL OF TROUBLE OVER A PERIOD OF NEARLY A

DECADE TO DISCREDIT A PERSON SHE HAS NEVER ATTENMPTED TO REACH VIA A SINGLE

EMAIL.

I HAVE NEVER FAILED TO RESPOND POLITELY TO ANYONE WHO CONTACTED ME, EVEN

SELF-DECLARED HOSTILE PERSONS SUCH AS BARB. I ALWAYS PRAY FOR THEM, TOO...

Museum in the Netherlands closed ...

SHE WELL KNOWS IT CLOSED EARLY IN 2004, AS HER NEWSGROUP ANNOUNCED IT ON

THE INTERNET. WAS MAINLY OPEN FOR THE 40TH ANNIVERSARY, THOUGH WE HOPED THE

GALLERY WOULD STAY OPEN LONGER. NIGEL TURNER SAT IN THAT MUSEUM WITH ME AND

SHOWED 'THE LOVE AFFAIR' JUST DAYS BEFORE IT WAS SEEN ON THE HISTORY

CHANNEL. HE THEN WENT TO THE US AND SAW IT WITH MY SISTER. HE THEN WENT TO

MARINA OSWALD IN ROCKWELL, TEXAS, AND SHOWED IT TO HER. SHE SAID, "SO, HE

HAD AN AFFAIR...."

and empty from what I was told by someone just a couple of days ago.

AN INTERNET CAFE MOVED INTO THE MUSEUM SPACE IN 2004.

==I ASK THAT THE THRUST NOT BE DIVERTED, THE FOCUS NOT BE DIVERTED, BY THIS

TWISTED VERSION OF MY TEN AND A HALF MONTHS IN THE POLITICAL ASYLUM SYSTEM

IN SWEDEN...SORRY I OFTEN WROTE 'IN POLITICAL ASYLUM' AND LEFT OUT THE WORD

'SYSTEM' AND SHOULD BE CRUCIFIED, AS WELL AS PAN AND MARTIN, FOR NOT USING

LANGUAGE SUCH AS MUST BE USED IN A COURT OF LAW. IT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO

MISLEAD, UNLIKE THIS SCREED FROM BARB THAT YOU HAVE JUST READ,

THE INTENTION IS TO DIVERT, ACCUSE ENOUGH THAT THE 'GOLDEN MEAN' IS INVOKED,

--THEY SAY IF A PERSON IS ACCUSED OFTEN ENOUGH, THAT PERSON 'MUST' NOT BE

INNOCENT==

THIS MEANS HAS BEEN USED TO DISTRACT AND DENOUNCE AND DIVERT.

THESE ARE NOT SINCERE RESEARCHERS. I A SURE THAT JACK WHITE, FOR EXAMPLE,

IS SINCERE. PROBABLY OTHERS WHO JUMPED ALL OVER ME. FOR THEY HAD READ

DAMNING EXCERPTS. I DID NOT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT MY SIDE OF

THINGS.

I URGE YOU TO SAVE THIS FOR THE RECORD AND THEN PLEASE GO ON TO WHAT IS

TRULY IMPORTANT, FOR WHICH REASONS I HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO LIVE SAFELY IN THE

US.

BTW, WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE BARB AND MCADAMS, ETC. GOING THROUGH ALL YOUR

RECORDS, WHEREVER THEY COULD FIND THEM, FOR A DECADE?

JUDYTH

Bests,

Barb :-)

BARB SAID IT WAS EASY TO GET THE TRANSLATION...BUT POSTED THE INFO

BELOW...NOTE MY COMMENTS ARE IN CAPS. I ALSO CAN PROVIDE THE

DOCUMENTS. (PERSONAL--EVEN

THOUGH THEY PUBLISHED MY FILE NUMBER, PLEASE COVER IT UP! REMEMBER, THIS IS

BEING CONDUCTED TO RED HERRING THE EVIDENCE PRODUCTION EFFORT)

Judyth sought asylum in Sweden. Her application was denied about a month

after she made it. In Sweden, one can appeal that decision, and while

waiting for the appeal to be processed and looked at, "asylum seekers" are

taken care of by the Swedish government. Judyth did appeal. Sweden does not

refer to it as "provisional asylum."

Judyth's appeal took about 7 mos, as I recall. It was denied as well and she

had two weeks (or maybe 6, don't have the docs in front of me) to leave the

country. She didn't leave. She was then served with a notice to appear at

which time her journey home would be discussed. She left Sweden two weeks

later.

Martin posted that Judyth had sent him the letter proving she had been

granted asylum on appeal. He sent it to Tony Marsh to put up on his site.

Here's what I posted in reply to Tony ... so this post includes Martin's

claim, the link to the doc Tony put up, the translation of the doc, and the

link to the Swedish - English translator.

Barb Junkkarinen View profile

(1 user) More options Dec 12 2008, 6:54 pm

Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk

From: Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net>

Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 18:54:12 -0800

Local: Fri, Dec 12 2008 6:54 pm

Subject: Judyth's "proof" of a successful appeal for asylum

Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original | Report this message |

Find messages by this author

Thanks to Tony, this is up on his site.

On 12 Dec 2008 20:24:17 -0500, Anthony Marsh- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

<anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:

>Barb Junkkarinen wrote:

>> On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh

>> <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:

>>> Martin Shackelford wrote:

>>>> I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,

>>>> which was issued in July of this year.

>>> Translation? Babblefish?

>> Just put the document up, Anthony. There are several translators

>> available, as well as at least one person who can read Swedish.

>You can read Swedish? It is in a JPG file so I don't see how any automatic

>translator could handle it. I think you'll have to OCR it first.

This is so short it's easy to type in to a translator.

Martin should have done so before flying off halfcocked again.

Judyth says this is her document saying her appeal was successful and

she had been granted asylum???

First of all, it's obviously an appointment letter with a date, time

and place listed ... and a phone number to call.

What's the appt about? Type the top line into any Swedish to English

translator.

"Du kallas till Migrationsverket for att prata om din hemresa"

translates as.....

QUOTE Translation: Swedish » English

"You are called to the Migration Board for talking about your journey home"

Does "provisional asylum" mean the "protection of a foreign government"? If so,

there ought to be some official documentation available.

Is she no longer under "Dankbaar asylum" in Amsterdam? What happened to

her LHO Museum there?

Why does she refuse to accept the massive 12 year documentation of John

Armstrong?

[John Dolva]

yes, that's the correct translation.

Also, with regards to information privacy. That is a serious issue in Sweden and some years, (a decade or more maybe), ago a pretty big scandal was brewing over breaks in the privacy codes.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Judyth's preliminary response to Jack White about "the two Oswalds":

Wish I had Armstrong's book--that's the crux of the problem...I only have quotes....but even from the quotes, I can provide information and will try to assemble some more.

Jack White says Armstrong's book is full of plenty of stuff.

He says Armstrong 'researched' me...a few emails and perhaps one phone call...told Sydney and others that because I was not pregnant in New Orleans, I could not have posed as marina--even though at one point I tried to use a pillow, yes, I did.

He told people at Copa that because I said I was not pregnant, he dismissed everything I had to say after that.

Since I 'could not' have posed as Marina Oswald, even though she was sequestered and only went to the local library and food stores, twice to Pontchatrain Beach, and was in the French quarter only with Ruth Paine, not accompanied by Lee...as we had been there quite a few times, I believe that's why he stayed behind. The excursion to the French quarter with Ruth Paine just before they left for Texas--and Lee went off to Mexico City--is described in plenty of detail.

Armstrong never gave me a chance, and Jack should look into Armstrong's book to see if there is a single reference to me in the entire enormous book--if only to dismiss what I had to say, there should be something.

I will be happy to provide a long list of objections. Then you'll see why DellaRosa simply erased everything I wrote.

It will take some time, because I am tired from weeping over loss of Martha and have one final chapter in our book to finish for Laura. Martha would want me to finish the book we nearly had completed when she died. I am going to do that translation work tonight...

I will send more information tomorrow or Tuesday on "the two Oswalds".

Meanwhile, I attach more files of interest:

1) 1963 National Institutes of Health published their report on activities they funded. Please note the items regarding viruses and cancer. The bioweapon project was supported by NIH research, funds and personnel in many peripheral aspects, some of which are evident on this page of the report.

2) a-1 employment showing Lee's May 15 visit...a-1 check front and back...I used "Mrs. Robert A. Baker, III" to hide my name, but the account was under 'Judy Baker' so that was written on the back.

I also have bank statement, but that is also connected with the American Express matter...It all happened in the same bank statement. I also have the a-1 fine print blown up showing they were supposed to take much more than what the a-1 check is for. Lee got the amount reduced tremendously so I'd have money for food, etc. As my new husband really had let me down--he was unable to be reached and was out of town for weeks, without leaving even his phone number where he could be reached in an emergency. Lee helped me many ways that summer while I was virtually abandoned for weeks at a time...

Amazing.

I find it interesting that though JVB says her new husband left her "immediately" after

their marriage she somehow (not explained) was able to conceive 5 beautiful children

by someone. Mr. Baker is very conspicuous by his absence in her stories.

Thanks to whomever accumulated all these quotes, sayings, non-sayings, rebuttals, excuses,

etc. which I had never seen. They are helpful in trying to understand this strange hiccup

in the JFK case.

I wish that included had been the JVB responses to the 12 years of documented research

by John Armstrong showing that two different persons (or more) used the name "Lee

Harvey Oswald". As I recall, her reply was that there was only ONE Oswald..."LEE".

According to Armstrong's documentation, the LHO who worked at Reily Coffee Company

was not Lee, but HARVEY. I guess "Lee" withheld that secret from her.

Edited March 7, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Jack,

Since the CIA specializes in the fabrication of documents and records and, as you

are well aware, photographs, what do you take to be the most important proofs

that there were two Oswalds, one called "Harvey" and one called "Lee"? I'm not

after a recapitulation of Armstrong's massive tomb. As you know, a book can be

weighty but without thereby vindicating its scholarship, as with Bugliosi. What I'm

asking for is the evidence he provides that you have found to be most persuasive.

And I am not talking about anti-Judyth. I am talking about pro-"Harvey and Lee".

Many thanks!

Jim

Amazing.

I find it interesting that though JVB says her new husband left her "immediately" after

their marriage she somehow (not explained) was able to conceive 5 beautiful children

by someone. Mr. Baker is very conspicuous by his absence in her stories.

Thanks to whomever accumulated all these quotes, sayings, non-sayings, rebuttals, excuses,

etc. which I had never seen. They are helpful in trying to understand this strange hiccup

in the JFK case.

I wish that included had been the JVB responses to the 12 years of documented research

by John Armstrong showing that two different persons (or more) used the name "Lee

Harvey Oswald". As I recall, her reply was that there was only ONE Oswald..."LEE".

According to Armstrong's documentation, the LHO who worked at Reily Coffee Company

was not Lee, but HARVEY. I guess "Lee" withheld that secret from her.

Edited March 7, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Jack White]

Jack,

Since the CIA specializes in the fabrication of documents and records and, as you

are well aware, photographs, what do you take to be the most important proofs

that there were two Oswalds, one called "Harvey" and one called "Lee"? I'm not

after a recapitulation of Armstrong's massive tomb. As you know, a book can be

weighty but without thereby vindicating its scholarship, as with Bugliosi. What I'm

asking for is the evidence he provides that you have found to be most persuasive.

And I am not talking about anti-Judyth. I am talking about pro-"Harvey and Lee".

Many thanks!

Jim

Amazing.

I find it interesting that though JVB says her new husband left her "immediately" after

their marriage she somehow (not explained) was able to conceive 5 beautiful children

by someone. Mr. Baker is very conspicuous by his absence in her stories.

Thanks to whomever accumulated all these quotes, sayings, non-sayings, rebuttals, excuses,

etc. which I had never seen. They are helpful in trying to understand this strange hiccup

in the JFK case.

I wish that included had been the JVB responses to the 12 years of documented research

by John Armstrong showing that two different persons (or more) used the name "Lee

Harvey Oswald". As I recall, her reply was that there was only ONE Oswald..."LEE".

According to Armstrong's documentation, the LHO who worked at Reily Coffee Company

was not Lee, but HARVEY. I guess "Lee" withheld that secret from her.

Jim...you are FAR FAR afield when you compare Armstrong to Bugliosi!

I take it you have not read Harvey and Lee, because the question you

ask has no answer. It is the totality of the documentation which proves

TWO OSWALDS, a conclusion I had reached long before I ever knew

John. I worked with John, helping him research and self-publish the book

for 12 years.

Since you have not read the book, you cannot conceive how insulting it

is to John to compare his voluminous research to the Bugliosi trash. I

suppose also that you have never seen my video "Faces".

Jack

[Jack White]

Jack,

Since the CIA specializes in the fabrication of documents and records and, as you

are well aware, photographs, what do you take to be the most important proofs

that there were two Oswalds, one called "Harvey" and one called "Lee"? I'm not

after a recapitulation of Armstrong's massive tomb. As you know, a book can be

weighty but without thereby vindicating its scholarship, as with Bugliosi. What I'm

asking for is the evidence he provides that you have found to be most persuasive.

And I am not talking about anti-Judyth. I am talking about pro-"Harvey and Lee".

Many thanks!

Jim

Amazing.

I find it interesting that though JVB says her new husband left her "immediately" after

their marriage she somehow (not explained) was able to conceive 5 beautiful children

by someone. Mr. Baker is very conspicuous by his absence in her stories.

Thanks to whomever accumulated all these quotes, sayings, non-sayings, rebuttals, excuses,

etc. which I had never seen. They are helpful in trying to understand this strange hiccup

in the JFK case.

I wish that included had been the JVB responses to the 12 years of documented research

by John Armstrong showing that two different persons (or more) used the name "Lee

Harvey Oswald". As I recall, her reply was that there was only ONE Oswald..."LEE".

According to Armstrong's documentation, the LHO who worked at Reily Coffee Company

was not Lee, but HARVEY. I guess "Lee" withheld that secret from her.

Jim...you are FAR FAR afield when you compare Armstrong to Bugliosi!

I take it you have not read Harvey and Lee, because the question you

ask has no answer. It is the totality of the documentation which proves

TWO OSWALDS, a conclusion I had reached long before I ever knew

John. I worked with John, helping him research and self-publish the book

for 12 years.

Since you have not read the book, you cannot conceive how insulting it

is to John to compare his voluminous research to the Bugliosi trash. I

suppose also that you have never seen my video "Faces".

Jack

Jim...please ask JVB which of the guys on my video cover was the one

she knew. Or maybe it was this one. I have dozens of others. Maybe

you can get her identification of the one she knew. That would really

advance the case.

Jack

[Jack White]

Jim...JVB claimed to be one of the women in this photo. Please ask her which one is her. Thanks.

Jack

[Jack White]

Jim...years ago on the DellaRosa Forum, JVB declined to answer any personal

questions about LHO...such as info about:

Marina

Robert

Marguerite

John Pic

Fort Worth

Dallas

Russia

How he learned to speak Russian

Zigers

Schooling

LHO time in service and where

His daughter

Whether he had a missing tooth

Whether he was circumcised

Whether she knew Marina was pregnant

Perhaps Lee was reluctant to discuss personal matters with her.

Jack

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Jack,

You missed my point. I have frequently heard you state the extensiveness of

John Armstrong's research and the massiveness of his book. My point is that

the extensiveness of research and the massiveness of a book does not tell us

whether or not it is well founded, where Bugliosi wrote a massive tomb with

extensive notes and all that, yet you and I and most of the rest of the forum

would dismiss it as rubbish. (See, for example, the reviews by David Mantik,

Jim DiEugenio, and me on http://assassinationresearch.com.) So while I am

aware that his research has been extensive and his book is massive, I want

to know the arguments he presents that you personally have found to be the

most persuasive in convincing you there were two Oswalds, Harvey and Lee.

I am not prejudging anything and not saying his book is worthless. On the

contrary, I am asking what you have found most persuasive about his work.

Jim

Jack,

Since the CIA specializes in the fabrication of documents and records and, as you

are well aware, photographs, what do you take to be the most important proofs

that there were two Oswalds, one called "Harvey" and one called "Lee"? I'm not

after a recapitulation of Armstrong's massive tomb. As you know, a book can be

weighty but without thereby vindicating its scholarship, as with Bugliosi. What I'm

asking for is the evidence he provides that you have found to be most persuasive.

And I am not talking about anti-Judyth. I am talking about pro-"Harvey and Lee".

Many thanks!

Jim

Amazing.

I find it interesting that though JVB says her new husband left her "immediately" after

their marriage she somehow (not explained) was able to conceive 5 beautiful children

by someone. Mr. Baker is very conspicuous by his absence in her stories.

Thanks to whomever accumulated all these quotes, sayings, non-sayings, rebuttals, excuses,

etc. which I had never seen. They are helpful in trying to understand this strange hiccup

in the JFK case.

I wish that included had been the JVB responses to the 12 years of documented research

by John Armstrong showing that two different persons (or more) used the name "Lee

Harvey Oswald". As I recall, her reply was that there was only ONE Oswald..."LEE".

According to Armstrong's documentation, the LHO who worked at Reily Coffee Company

was not Lee, but HARVEY. I guess "Lee" withheld that secret from her.

Jim...you are FAR FAR afield when you compare Armstrong to Bugliosi!

I take it you have not read Harvey and Lee, because the question you

ask has no answer. It is the totality of the documentation which proves

TWO OSWALDS, a conclusion I had reached long before I ever knew

John. I worked with John, helping him research and self-publish the book

for 12 years.

Since you have not read the book, you cannot conceive how insulting it

is to John to compare his voluminous research to the Bugliosi trash. I

suppose also that you have never seen my video "Faces".

Jack

Edited March 7, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Barb Junkkarinen]

yes, that's the correct translation.

Also, with regards to information privacy. That is a serious issue in Sweden and some years, (a decade or more maybe), ago a pretty big scandal was brewing over breaks in the privacy codes.

The Swedish man came forward with the documents .... they were given to him by the Swedish Migration Dept. as they are public records. He is also not unnamed .... Judyth herself even said later in her ramble that he posted on the mod group. Judyth does go on so .... I stand by what I wrote. No one was looking for Judyth or calling her an illegal alien in hiding anywhere to my knowledge. Judyth goes on and on .... and on ... and really says nothing. After all her comments, I do appreciate that she left my entire post attached at the end where I myself say she applied, it was denied, but that she appealed and the Swedish process is to take care of asylum seekers while they are awaiting a decision on their appeal.

The only reason any of this became an issue was because of Pamela's posts and her and Martin's claims that Judyth had been granted asylum somewhere ... and then Pam posted that she could now reveal it was Sweden. The man, I think his name is Glenn, is Swedish, in Sweden, and saw the news and something in the paper ... how he found the mod group, I do not recall. He checked to see if it was true that she had been granted asylum as it did not sound right to him anymore than it sounded right to anyone else. It was just one more episode of untruths being floated as fact ... that's the only reason it held any interest for me.

It is the claims she makes that make her a part of our history, of our president's assassination, that concern me. Anyone off on a wild goose chase because of claims should want to know if those claims are true, yet after nearly a decade of promotion, not the simplest most basic fact checking had been done. We knew Judyth had worked at Reily, we knew she was a much lauded science student. Beyond that, nothing much that could be checked had been checked. Myself and some others began doing that. If the basics that can be checked, don't check out ... and with a steady stream of excuses and revisions ... just how much confidence can anyone reasonably put in things she says that cannot be checked?

The truth about the assassination is what matters to me. Our historical truth is not a game.

Judyth is very bright. I wish her nothing but the best. I wish she could leave all this, put it behind her, come home to the US and live the life of a loving grandma and mother.

Here, I found the gentleman's last post:

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 12:16:14 -0600, Glenn Viklund <glenn54.viklund@dataphone.se> wrote:

>

>

>I received the confirmation of the dates in Judyth Vary Bakers asylum

>process in Sweden, below. From Anna Bergström at the Swedish Migration

>Board. Above that, I’m translating the message, line by line.

>

>Här kommer de uppgifter som du fick muntligt när

>vi pratade i telefon i fredags.

>

>

>

>This is the information you were given in our phone conversation on Friday.

>

>

>Det gäller alltså den person som du namngav vid

>samtalet, d v s Judyth Vary Baker:

>

>This relates to the person you named at our conversation, Judyth Vary Baker.

>

>- Asylansökan 2007-09-11

>

>- Asylum application 2007-09-11

>

>

>- Migrationsverkets beslut, avslag på ansökan om

>uppehållstillstånd, 2007-11-11

>

>- The Migration Boards decision; rejection of

>application for Permanent Resident Permit, 2007-11-11

>

>

>- Beslutet överklagades 2007-11-28

>

>- This decision was appealed 2007-11-28

>

>

>- Beslut om inhibition av Migrationsdomstolen

>2007-11-30 (d v s beslutet om avvisning får inte

>verkställas så länge beslutet om inhibition gäller)

>

>- Decision of ”inhibition” by the

>Migration Board 2007-11-30 (ie. Decision of

>deportation cannot be executed as long as “inhibition” applies)

>

>

>

>-- Beslut att ej bifalla överklagandet,

>Migrationsdomstolen 2008-06-02 (beslutet om

>inhibition upphävdes genom denna dom)

>

>-- Decision to reject the appeal, The Swedish

>Migration Court 2008-06-02 (decision of

>inhibition revoked through this verdict)

>

>

>

>Enligt Migrationsverkets registrering är domen

>verkställd genom att sökanden rest ut ur landet 2008-07-14.

>

>According to records held at the Migration

>Board, this verdict has been carried out as the

>applicant left the county 2008-07-14

>

>

>

>Mvh, Anna Bergström

>

>Best regards, Anna Bergström

>

>

>Inhibition revoked means, as I discussed in a previous posting, that she

>will have to leave the country at will of the Swedish Authorities. Which

>I no way necessarily means any kind of “force”. As we know, she came to a

>meeting in the beginning of July and left the country a week later.

>

>

>And so, if this is JVBs own words, as posted in the forum today:

>

>

>“I was unable to show you the Holland permits until now --- as the Swedish

>government kept my passport. I can now show you one of the permits. NOTE:

>I am choosing to leave Sweden, after ten months. The law is an American

>can stay only 90 days in Sweden, but I was given political asylum for ten

>months. INTERESTING: BECAUSE I WAS IN POLITICAL ASYLUM, MY PASSPORTHAS

>NOT BEEN STAMPED ! NOT AT ALL! IT'S THE WAY THEY DO ITIF YOU ARE IN

>POLITICAL ASYLUM. NO RECORD OF WHERE YOUWERE. ALL FOR MY PROTECTION, YOU

>CAN'T TELL I WAS EVER IN SWEDEN! My life was saved. I could have

>petitioned for permanent residency, here, but I'd probably be rejected

>because of my age (over 65). I can't afford to stay without social

>security here,on MY social security, with the dollar in trouble, it is too

>expensive, so I'm moving. I've been given a letter explaining that I was

>not deported, because Barb and others will of course try to say that, and

>that is not true.”

>

>

>…then it does not have too much resemblance with

>the asylum process described above.

>

>

>

>Best regards,

>

>Glenn Viklund

There are many many posts, Pamela kicked off major threads and much info is all scattered within them.

There hasn't been any interest or talk about Judyth in months and months. Wonderful timing on Judyth's part in making friends with Fetzer. She has a book coming out.

Bests,

Barb :-)

[Jack White]

Jack,

You missed my point. I have frequently heard you state the extensiveness of

John Armstrong's research and the massiveness of his book. My point is that

the extensiveness of research and the massiveness of a book does not tell us

whether or not it is well founded, where Bugliosi wrote a massive tomb with

extensive notes and all that, yet you and I and most of the rest of the forum

would dismiss it as rubbish. (See for examples the reviews by David Mantik,

Jim DiEugenio, and me on http://assassinationresearch.com.) So while I am

aware that his research has been extensive and his book is massive, I want

to know the arguments he presents that you personally have found to be the

most persuasive in convincing you there were two Oswalds, Harvey and Lee.

I am not prejudging anything and not saying his book is worthless. On the

contrary, I am asking what you have found most persuasive about his work.

Jim

Jack,

Since the CIA specializes in the fabrication of documents and records and, as you

are well aware, photographs, what do you take to be the most important proofs

that there were two Oswalds, one called "Harvey" and one called "Lee"? I'm not

after a recapitulation of Armstrong's massive tomb. As you know, a book can be

weighty but without thereby vindicating its scholarship, as with Bugliosi. What I'm

asking for is the evidence he provides that you have found to be most persuasive.

And I am not talking about anti-Judyth. I am talking about pro-"Harvey and Lee".

Many thanks!

Jim

Amazing.

I find it interesting that though JVB says her new husband left her "immediately" after

their marriage she somehow (not explained) was able to conceive 5 beautiful children

by someone. Mr. Baker is very conspicuous by his absence in her stories.

Thanks to whomever accumulated all these quotes, sayings, non-sayings, rebuttals, excuses,

etc. which I had never seen. They are helpful in trying to understand this strange hiccup

in the JFK case.

I wish that included had been the JVB responses to the 12 years of documented research

by John Armstrong showing that two different persons (or more) used the name "Lee

Harvey Oswald". As I recall, her reply was that there was only ONE Oswald..."LEE".

According to Armstrong's documentation, the LHO who worked at Reily Coffee Company

was not Lee, but HARVEY. I guess "Lee" withheld that secret from her.

Jim...you are FAR FAR afield when you compare Armstrong to Bugliosi!

I take it you have not read Harvey and Lee, because the question you

ask has no answer. It is the totality of the documentation which proves

TWO OSWALDS, a conclusion I had reached long before I ever knew

John. I worked with John, helping him research and self-publish the book

for 12 years.

Since you have not read the book, you cannot conceive how insulting it

is to John to compare his voluminous research to the Bugliosi trash. I

suppose also that you have never seen my video "Faces".

Jack

Jim, the only answer I can give is READ THE BOOK.

Alternatively, I have to say JOHN'S UNIQUE APPROACH to organization of

all the documents is the one thing which sets it apart from others.

He spent 5 or 6 years ORGANIZING A TIMELINE of every (EVERY!) document

or book which mentions Oswald or anything related. He filled 40+ 4" ring binders

with these documents organized BY DATES and PLACES. He thus found that

for nearly every document that stated LHO was in a certain place at a certain

time, there was a contrary document that stated that he was in ANOTHER PLACE

at that SAME TIME. It is all in the book.

He documents clearly that there were TWO MARGUERITES for the two young

boys. They resembled each other only superficially. One Marguerite worked

at Paul's Shoe Store on Houston Street in Fort Worth while LHO attended

Stripling Junior High School on the west side, the same school Robert had

attended. The other Marguerite AT THE SAME TIME worked at a hosiery store

on Canal Street in New Orleans while the other LHO attended Beauregard

Junior High School in New Orleans. John conducted interviews with dozens

of former teachers and students AT BOTH SCHOOLS, proving THAT THERE

WERE TWO LHOs IN TWO DIFFERENT CITIES WHILE LHO WAS IN THE NINTH

GRADE.

He conducted hundreds of interviews, for instance flying to Argentina to interview

the Ziger sisters, with whom LHO lived in Minsk. The sisters told John that LHO

was a VERY SHORT BOY, ONLY ABOUT 5'2".

Like I say, you gotta read the book.

Jack

Edited March 7, 2010 by Jack White

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Nothing about anything Barb Junkkarinen has ever posted gave me any hope that she was interested in historical truth!

yes, that's the correct translation.

Also, with regards to information privacy. That is a serious issue in Sweden and some years, (a decade or more maybe), ago a pretty big scandal was brewing over breaks in the privacy codes.

The Swedish man came forward with the documents .... they were given to him by the Swedish Migration Dept. as they are public records. He is also not unnamed .... Judyth herself even said later in her ramble that he posted on the mod group. Judyth does go on so .... I stand by what I wrote. No one was looking for Judyth or calling her an illegal alien in hiding anywhere to my knowledge. Judyth goes on and on .... and on ... and really says nothing. After all her comments, I do appreciate that she left my entire post attached at the end where I myself say she applied, it was denied, but that she appealed and the Swedish process is to take care of asylum seekers while they are awaiting a decision on their appeal.

The only reason any of this became an issue was because of Pamela's posts and her and Martin's claims that Judyth had been granted asylum somewhere ... and then Pam posted that she could now reveal it was Sweden. The man, I think his name is Glenn, is Swedish, in Sweden, and saw the news and something in the paper ... how he found the mod group, I do not recall. He checked to see if it was true that she had been granted asylum as it did not sound right to him anymore than it sounded right to anyone else. It was just one more episode of untruths being floated as fact ... that's the only reason it held any interest for me.

It is the claims she makes that make her a part of our history, of our president's assassination, that concern me. Anyone off on a wild goose chase because of claims should want to know if those claims are true, yet after nearly a decade of promotion, not the simplest most basic fact checking had been done. We knew Judyth had worked at Reily, we knew she was a much lauded science student. Beyond that, nothing much that could be checked had been checked. Myself and some others began doing that. If the basics that can be checked, don't check out ... and with a steady stream of excuses and revisions ... just how much confidence can anyone reasonably put in things she says that cannot be checked?

The truth about the assassination is what matters to me. Our historical truth is not a game.

Judyth is very bright. I wish her nothing but the best. I wish she could leave all this, put it behind her, come home to the US and live the life of a loving grandma and mother.

Here, I found the gentleman's last post:

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 12:16:14 -0600, Glenn Viklund <glenn54.viklund@dataphone.se> wrote:

>

>

>I received the confirmation of the dates in Judyth Vary Bakers asylum

>process in Sweden, below. From Anna Bergström at the Swedish Migration

>Board. Above that, I’m translating the message, line by line.

>

>Här kommer de uppgifter som du fick muntligt när

>vi pratade i telefon i fredags.

>

>

>

>This is the information you were given in our phone conversation on Friday.

>

>

>Det gäller alltså den person som du namngav vid

>samtalet, d v s Judyth Vary Baker:

>

>This relates to the person you named at our conversation, Judyth Vary Baker.

>

>- Asylansökan 2007-09-11

>

>- Asylum application 2007-09-11

>

>

>- Migrationsverkets beslut, avslag på ansökan om

>uppehållstillstånd, 2007-11-11

>

>- The Migration Boards decision; rejection of

>application for Permanent Resident Permit, 2007-11-11

>

>

>- Beslutet överklagades 2007-11-28

>

>- This decision was appealed 2007-11-28

>

>

>- Beslut om inhibition av Migrationsdomstolen

>2007-11-30 (d v s beslutet om avvisning får inte

>verkställas så länge beslutet om inhibition gäller)

>

>- Decision of ”inhibition” by the

>Migration Board 2007-11-30 (ie. Decision of

>deportation cannot be executed as long as “inhibition” applies)

>

>

>

>-- Beslut att ej bifalla överklagandet,

>Migrationsdomstolen 2008-06-02 (beslutet om

>inhibition upphävdes genom denna dom)

>

>-- Decision to reject the appeal, The Swedish

>Migration Court 2008-06-02 (decision of

>inhibition revoked through this verdict)

>

>

>

>Enligt Migrationsverkets registrering är domen

>verkställd genom att sökanden rest ut ur landet 2008-07-14.

>

>According to records held at the Migration

>Board, this verdict has been carried out as the

>applicant left the county 2008-07-14

>

>

>

>Mvh, Anna Bergström

>

>Best regards, Anna Bergström

>

>

>Inhibition revoked means, as I discussed in a previous posting, that she

>will have to leave the country at will of the Swedish Authorities. Which

>I no way necessarily means any kind of “force”. As we know, she came to a

>meeting in the beginning of July and left the country a week later.

>

>

>And so, if this is JVBs own words, as posted in the forum today:

>

>

>“I was unable to show you the Holland permits until now --- as the Swedish

>government kept my passport. I can now show you one of the permits. NOTE:

>I am choosing to leave Sweden, after ten months. The law is an American

>can stay only 90 days in Sweden, but I was given political asylum for ten

>months. INTERESTING: BECAUSE I WAS IN POLITICAL ASYLUM, MY PASSPORTHAS

>NOT BEEN STAMPED ! NOT AT ALL! IT'S THE WAY THEY DO ITIF YOU ARE IN

>POLITICAL ASYLUM. NO RECORD OF WHERE YOUWERE. ALL FOR MY PROTECTION, YOU

>CAN'T TELL I WAS EVER IN SWEDEN! My life was saved. I could have

>petitioned for permanent residency, here, but I'd probably be rejected

>because of my age (over 65). I can't afford to stay without social

>security here,on MY social security, with the dollar in trouble, it is too

>expensive, so I'm moving. I've been given a letter explaining that I was

>not deported, because Barb and others will of course try to say that, and

>that is not true.”

>

>

>…then it does not have too much resemblance with

>the asylum process described above.

>

>

>

>Best regards,

>

>Glenn Viklund

There are many many posts, Pamela kicked off major threads and much info is all scattered within them.

There hasn't been any interest or talk about Judyth in months and months. Wonderful timing on Judyth's part in making friends with Fetzer. She has a book coming out.

Bests,

Barb :-)

Edited March 7, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Jack,

Operatives are commonly REQUIRED to maintain a diary, so the agency can

create false documentary records of their having been at other locations at

the same time. What you are telling me is completely consistent with the CIA

having created a false but parallel documentary record that could have been

used at anytime questions were raised about where he was when. So if that

is what Armstrong has it may be no more than the false but parallel history

that was deliberately created to be used selectively to discount research on

the alleged assassin. You are going to have to do better than tell me READ

THE BOOK. That is the kind of answer I would expect from BUGLIOSI. So

if you are going to defend Armstrong, you need to do far better than that.

I am going to encourage Judyth to respond to you, my friend. Thank you.

Jim

Jack,

You missed my point. I have frequently heard you state the extensiveness of

John Armstrong's research and the massiveness of his book. My point is that

the extensiveness of research and the massiveness of a book does not tell us

whether or not it is well founded, where Bugliosi wrote a massive tomb with

extensive notes and all that, yet you and I and most of the rest of the forum

would dismiss it as rubbish. (See for examples the reviews by David Mantik,

Jim DiEugenio, and me on http://assassinationresearch.com.) So while I am

aware that his research has been extensive and his book is massive, I want

to know the arguments he presents that you personally have found to be the

most persuasive in convincing you there were two Oswalds, Harvey and Lee.

I am not prejudging anything and not saying his book is worthless. On the

contrary, I am asking what you have found most persuasive about his work.

Jim

Jack,

Since the CIA specializes in the fabrication of documents and records and, as you

are well aware, photographs, what do you take to be the most important proofs

that there were two Oswalds, one called "Harvey" and one called "Lee"? I'm not

after a recapitulation of Armstrong's massive tomb. As you know, a book can be

weighty but without thereby vindicating its scholarship, as with Bugliosi. What I'm

asking for is the evidence he provides that you have found to be most persuasive.

And I am not talking about anti-Judyth. I am talking about pro-"Harvey and Lee".

Many thanks!

Jim

Amazing.

I find it interesting that though JVB says her new husband left her "immediately" after

their marriage she somehow (not explained) was able to conceive 5 beautiful children

by someone. Mr. Baker is very conspicuous by his absence in her stories.

Thanks to whomever accumulated all these quotes, sayings, non-sayings, rebuttals, excuses,

etc. which I had never seen. They are helpful in trying to understand this strange hiccup

in the JFK case.

I wish that included had been the JVB responses to the 12 years of documented research

by John Armstrong showing that two different persons (or more) used the name "Lee

Harvey Oswald". As I recall, her reply was that there was only ONE Oswald..."LEE".

According to Armstrong's documentation, the LHO who worked at Reily Coffee Company

was not Lee, but HARVEY. I guess "Lee" withheld that secret from her.

Jim...you are FAR FAR afield when you compare Armstrong to Bugliosi!

I take it you have not read Harvey and Lee, because the question you

ask has no answer. It is the totality of the documentation which proves

TWO OSWALDS, a conclusion I had reached long before I ever knew

John. I worked with John, helping him research and self-publish the book

for 12 years.

Since you have not read the book, you cannot conceive how insulting it

is to John to compare his voluminous research to the Bugliosi trash. I

suppose also that you have never seen my video "Faces".

Jack

Jim, the only answer I can give is READ THE BOOK.

Alternatively, I have to say JOHN'S UNIQUE APPROACH to organization of

all the documents is the one thing which sets it apart from others.

He spent 5 or 6 years ORGANIZING A TIMELINE of every (EVERY!) document

or book which mentions Oswald or anything related. He filled 40+ 4" ring binders

with these documents organized BY DATES and PLACES. He thus found that

for nearly every document that stated LHO was in a certain place at a certain

time, there was a contrary document that stated that he was in ANOTHER PLACE

at that SAME TIME. It is all in the book.

He documents clearly that there were TWO MARGUERITES for the two young

boys. They resembled each other only superficially. One Marguerite worked

at Paul's Shoe Store on Houston Street in Fort Worth while LHO attended

Stripling Junior High School on the west side, the same school Robert had

attended. The other Marguerite AT THE SAME TIME worked at a hosiery store

on Canal Street in New Orleans while the other LHO attended Beauregard

Junior High School in New Orleans. John conducted interviews with dozens

of former teachers and students AT BOTH SCHOOLS, proving THAT THERE

WERE TWO LHOs IN TWO DIFFERENT CITIES WHILE LHO WAS IN THE NINTH

GRADE.

He conducted hundreds of interviews, for instance flying to Argentina to interview

the Ziger sisters, with whom LHO lived in Minsk. The sisters told John that LHO

was a VERY SHORT BOY, ONLY ABOUT 5'2".

Like I say, you gotta read the book.

Jack

Edited March 7, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Jack White]

Jim...you just do not understand. The Armstrong book begins in 1939, with

the birth of Oswald (actually a little before that). The book covers all of his

early life. He did not become involved in intelligence operations until 1952,

when Marguerite took him to New York for "intelligence testing". It was at

that time the substitute LHO entered the picture, and the two boys lived

parallel lives until the departure for Russia, when Harvey took over and

Lee disappeared into the witness protection program. The CIA did not

require the young LHO to keep a diary. These are public records.

Unless you read the book, anything you say is speculation. Andy at Last

Hurrah still has a few copies left.

Jack

Jack,

Operatives are commonly REQUIRED to maintain a diary, so the agency can

create false documentary records of there having been at other locations at

the same time. What you are telling me is completely consistent with the CIA

having created a false but parallel documentary record that could have been

used at anytime questions were raised about where he was when. So if that

is what Armstrong has it may be no more than the false but parallel history

that was deliberately created to be used selectively to discount research on

the alleged assassin. You are going to have to do better than tell me READ

THE BOOK. That is the kind of answer I would expect from BUGLIOSI. So

if you are going to defend Armstrong, you need to do far better than that.

I am going to encourage Judyth to respond to you, my friend. Thank you.

Jim

Jack,

You missed my point. I have frequently heard you state the extensiveness of

John Armstrong's research and the massiveness of his book. My point is that

the extensiveness of research and the massiveness of a book does not tell us

whether or not it is well founded, where Bugliosi wrote a massive tomb with

extensive notes and all that, yet you and I and most of the rest of the forum

would dismiss it as rubbish. (See for examples the reviews by David Mantik,

Jim DiEugenio, and me on http://assassinationresearch.com.) So while I am

aware that his research has been extensive and his book is massive, I want

to know the arguments he presents that you personally have found to be the

most persuasive in convincing you there were two Oswalds, Harvey and Lee.

I am not prejudging anything and not saying his book is worthless. On the

contrary, I am asking what you have found most persuasive about his work.

Jim

Jack,

Since the CIA specializes in the fabrication of documents and records and, as you

are well aware, photographs, what do you take to be the most important proofs

that there were two Oswalds, one called "Harvey" and one called "Lee"? I'm not

after a recapitulation of Armstrong's massive tomb. As you know, a book can be

weighty but without thereby vindicating its scholarship, as with Bugliosi. What I'm

asking for is the evidence he provides that you have found to be most persuasive.

And I am not talking about anti-Judyth. I am talking about pro-"Harvey and Lee".

Many thanks!

Jim

Amazing.

I find it interesting that though JVB says her new husband left her "immediately" after

their marriage she somehow (not explained) was able to conceive 5 beautiful children

by someone. Mr. Baker is very conspicuous by his absence in her stories.

Thanks to whomever accumulated all these quotes, sayings, non-sayings, rebuttals, excuses,

etc. which I had never seen. They are helpful in trying to understand this strange hiccup

in the JFK case.

I wish that included had been the JVB responses to the 12 years of documented research

by John Armstrong showing that two different persons (or more) used the name "Lee

Harvey Oswald". As I recall, her reply was that there was only ONE Oswald..."LEE".

According to Armstrong's documentation, the LHO who worked at Reily Coffee Company

was not Lee, but HARVEY. I guess "Lee" withheld that secret from her.

Jim...you are FAR FAR afield when you compare Armstrong to Bugliosi!

I take it you have not read Harvey and Lee, because the question you

ask has no answer. It is the totality of the documentation which proves

TWO OSWALDS, a conclusion I had reached long before I ever knew

John. I worked with John, helping him research and self-publish the book

for 12 years.

Since you have not read the book, you cannot conceive how insulting it

is to John to compare his voluminous research to the Bugliosi trash. I

suppose also that you have never seen my video "Faces".

Jack

Jim, the only answer I can give is READ THE BOOK.

Alternatively, I have to say JOHN'S UNIQUE APPROACH to organization of

all the documents is the one thing which sets it apart from others.

He spent 5 or 6 years ORGANIZING A TIMELINE of every (EVERY!) document

or book which mentions Oswald or anything related. He filled 40+ 4" ring binders

with these documents organized BY DATES and PLACES. He thus found that

for nearly every document that stated LHO was in a certain place at a certain

time, there was a contrary document that stated that he was in ANOTHER PLACE

at that SAME TIME. It is all in the book.

He documents clearly that there were TWO MARGUERITES for the two young

boys. They resembled each other only superficially. One Marguerite worked

at Paul's Shoe Store on Houston Street in Fort Worth while LHO attended

Stripling Junior High School on the west side, the same school Robert had

attended. The other Marguerite AT THE SAME TIME worked at a hosiery store

on Canal Street in New Orleans while the other LHO attended Beauregard

Junior High School in New Orleans. John conducted interviews with dozens

of former teachers and students AT BOTH SCHOOLS, proving THAT THERE

WERE TWO LHOs IN TWO DIFFERENT CITIES WHILE LHO WAS IN THE NINTH

GRADE.

He conducted hundreds of interviews, for instance flying to Argentina to interview

the Ziger sisters, with whom LHO lived in Minsk. The sisters told John that LHO

was a VERY SHORT BOY, ONLY ABOUT 5'2".

Like I say, you gotta read the book.

Jack