Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[Jack White]

Adele has been quietly observing the latest round of JVB claims, content to not get

involved. But when Judyth brought up Jose Rivera, she felt she ought to counter

the false claims. JVB miscalculated Adele's involvement with Rivera, and to claim

that Adele "misunderstood" or "misremembered" what Judyth had said in a 3-hour

marathon phone call. Adele wants it known that SHE PAID VERY CLOSE ATTENTION

TO ANYTHING SAID ABOUT RIVERA, since it was very important to her. So she

emailed me further details of what Judyth said in that phone call:

You are so right about the tap dance - all over the stage. Judyth had told me Dr. Ochsner had brought her to New Orleans and was showing her around and that he introduced Rivera to her. If so, he would have had to have used the man's name, right? If that was true, then the man she met in the Medical School Library was supposed to have been Jose Rivera, right? And since she was the one telling me this story, and she used the name Rivera, and no other, then why should she have become so mistaken about it?

Well, we know she's covering up her miscalculation.

I certainly didn't make all this up, and I was not confused about what she had said. This was something I would be very interested in and something I would notice and remember, which I have, because, it seems, there was no Dr. Ochsner with Rivera in the Library at all. It was all imaginary and an attempt to lure me into supporting her strange story about Oswald and all that...

Adele wants nothing further to do with Judyth, but feels that she should counter the

false claim that she misunderstood or misinterpreted what was told to her.

Jack

[Glenn Viklund]

JUDYTH REPLIES TO BARB JUNKKARINEN ABOUT A MYSTERIOUS PERSON

However, my response to Edisen was also based on the supposition that he was Cuban. And Cubans were divided into "whites" and "negroes." He was obviously NOT a "negro" and that is what I conveyed to her, based on the belief that he was a Cuban.

That should have told her that I did not 'do research' on the man, but simply relied on my memory.

JVB[/b]

Edisen did not ask you his *race* ... or ethnicity ... or nationality. She asked you the *color* of his skin.

If you had "simply relied on" your memory, having seen him, you would had have a visual memory of the color of his skin.

Light, dark, light brown, medium, mocha choc-a-lata...whatever.

Not all "whites" (caucasian) are the same shade of white ... not all negroes are the same shade of brown or black ... saying "negro" or "white" does not define/identify the *color* of one's skin. Whether European, American, African, Hispanic/Latino, etc and whether from Cuba, Peru, Mexico, or Cincinnatti.... skin color varies from pasty white to black as night with no end to the beautiful shades of brown in between.

Sometimes, it's better to just put the shovel down, Judyth.

The JVB process ladder:

1. The tale.

2. Revise details when pointed out as incorrect.

3. The revised tale.

4. A whole new tale, "as originally intended".

Wonder where I saw this before?

Edited May 22, 2010 by Glenn Viklund

[Barb Junkkarinen]

Jose might be a cover name, Anne, Linda and Natalie are not exactly spanish

Looks like he was just about 18 when he came to the U.S. to go to college. and like he married

an American girl, not unusual for the kids to have American names, me thinks.

Bests,

Barb :-)

Ah ok, what year was this?

Hi John,

He was born in 1911, died in 1989.

He earned a bachelor's degree here at John's Hopkins, and then his medical degree from Georgetown in 1939.

There is 8 years of college ... unless he had some college in Peru before coming here, so his bachelor's may not

have taken 4 years here.

If it was 8 years, that would mean he came in 1931 ... so would have been more like 20 yrs old ... possibly a year or two older

if he'd already had some college before coming to the US ... and based on one bio I saw this morning, he had initially attended a college in Peru.

Either way, he came to this country in the early 1930's.

Here's the bio on Spartacus I saw this morning:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKrivera.htm

Bests,

Barb :-)

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Most of Judyth's critics don't even use the internet for research. 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.

<!--QuoteBegin-Garu BuellJudyth initially suggests that the 2001 email was perhaps invented. She maintains that she never used the americanwebworks address and later she questios the header. However+ eventually she acknowledges writing the email while mantaining that the circumcision paragraph was added or altered. But if there was an original email then why alter the web address or header? As Stephen Roy said earlier, Howard Platzman could perhaps settle this as he was copied on the email.

Judyth says that "60 Minutes" had asked her the same question in 1999,which makes sense, and if she has any evidence as to her answer to them I would be most interested in seeing it. [b--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Garu BuellJudyth initially suggests that the 2001 email was perhaps invented. She maintains that she never used the americanwebworks address and later she questios the header. However @ eventually she acknowledges writing the email while mantaining that the circumcision paragraph was added or altered. But if there was an original email then why alter the web address or header? As Stephen Roy said earlier, Howard Platzman could perhaps settle this as he was copied on the email.

Judyth says that "60 Minutes" had asked her the same question in 1999,which makes sense, and if she has any evidence as to her answer to them I would be most interested in seeing it. [</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Professor Fetzer has said that the matter is moot as LHO was "partially circumcised."[/b] I do not find this argument persuasive. It seems to me that Judyth, if her claims are true, would answer "yes" or "no" on the question and not both at different times. -- Gary Buell

Partial Circumcision. What a crock. I think Jim Fetzer would come up with anything to prove himself right. He's been far-fetched in the past when, imo, he said there was a beam placed on top of one of our satellites on Sept. 11 to bring the buildings down faster than free-fall.

Does anyone else think this is a possibility? Maybe some do. To me it's "out there." If you don't see things his way, he attacks you, throughout this thread.

Kathy C

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Doug,

Since you are one of the more rational among Judyth's critics, let me suggest that you

prepare your latest "top ten" reasons for disbelieving Judyth. I take for granted that

you will continue to ignore some of the most important reasons for believing her, such

as Kathy Santi and Anna Lewis, two living witnesses to crucial aspects of her story, and

the "disappearing witness" study I previously presented. So do this other thing, which

seems to appeal to you, namely: citing only the arguments on one side (against her).

Give us your "top ten" reasons, I will invite her response, and we can do it all again!

Jim

JVB is quite an accomplished tap-dancer.

The time of day is 7:54 a.m.

Jack

JUDYTH RESPONDS:

Edisen also has the impression that I said Ochsner introduced him to me. HOWEVER, DR. RIVERA WAS

MENTIONED IN A PRIVATE INTERVIEW WITH DR. OCHSNER at Charity Hospital. While he introduced me,

insofar as making me aware of him, because I had to go to the east Louisiana Mental Hospital, the intro

was NOT not face-to-face.

How can you be "introduced" to someone without meeting them? It would be like my telling people I had been introduced to Barack Obama because someone made me aware of him. This is absolute nonsense.

Doug Weldon

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Thank you, Evan. I and the other serious members of this thread are in your debt. That was the right thing to do. Jim

I have made a number of posts invisible pending a decision as to what thread they are more appropriate in, if any (they currently appear to be off-topic). I'll also be moving posts regarding ballistics, etc, to the ballistics thread.

Edited May 22, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Jack White]

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. 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.

<!--QuoteBegin-Garu BuellJudyth initially suggests that the 2001 email was perhaps invented. She maintains that she never used the americanwebworks address and later she questios the header. However+ eventually she acknowledges writing the email while mantaining that the circumcision paragraph was added or altered. But if there was an original email then why alter the web address or header? As Stephen Roy said earlier, Howard Platzman could perhaps settle this as he was copied on the email.

Judyth says that "60 Minutes" had asked her the same question in 1999,which makes sense, and if she has any evidence as to her answer to them I would be most interested in seeing it. [b--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Garu BuellJudyth initially suggests that the 2001 email was perhaps invented. She maintains that she never used the americanwebworks address and later she questios the header. However @ eventually she acknowledges writing the email while mantaining that the circumcision paragraph was added or altered. But if there was an original email then why alter the web address or header? As Stephen Roy said earlier, Howard Platzman could perhaps settle this as he was copied on the email.

Judyth says that "60 Minutes" had asked her the same question in 1999,which makes sense, and if she has any evidence as to her answer to them I would be most interested in seeing it. [</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Professor Fetzer has said that the matter is moot as LHO was "partially circumcised."[/b] I do not find this argument persuasive. It seems to me that Judyth, if her claims are true, would answer "yes" or "no" on the question and not both at different times. -- Gary Buell

Partial Circumcision. What a crock. I think Jim Fetzer would come up with anything to prove himself right. He's been far-fetched in the past when, imo, he said there was a beam placed on top of one of our satellites on Sept. 11 to bring the buildings down faster than free-fall.

Does anyone else think this is a possibility? Maybe some do. To me it's "out there." If you don't see things his way, he attacks you, throughout this thread.

Kathy C

[Mike Williams]

There have been various derailments, various insults thrown back and forward by various members throughout this thread (and now subsequently in other threads). I apologise for missing many of them, and they should have been removed before now. That's my fault for not paying closer attention.

Since that is the case, everyone shall start off with a clean slate. Just remember the rules:

- Don't question people's motives.

- Don't comment on people's research abilities.

- Don't call people liars, etc.

- Try to stay on topic.

Thank you.

Evan,

Very fair and thank you. Keep up the good work!

Best to you, and thank you for your service,

Mike

[Pamela Brown]

JW said: Adele wants nothing further to do with Judyth, but feels that she should counter the

false claim that she misunderstood or misinterpreted what was told to her.

I have no doubt that Adele will continue to evaluate Judyth's statements with the mindfulness and integrity with which she brought her own unusual experiences to the ARRB.

[Jack White]

JW said: Adele wants nothing further to do with Judyth, but feels that she should counter the

false claim that she misunderstood or misinterpreted what was told to her.

I have no doubt that Adele will continue to evaluate Judyth's statements with the mindfulness and integrity with which she brought her own unusual experiences to the ARRB.

Will someone interpret Pamela's ambiguous musing? I can't.

By the way, I guess everyone has lost interest in Judyth. This posting is the first time

in months that JVB has not been on page one. Maybe it was that naval officer said to

be Col. Rivera. Or maybe it was the circumcision or partial circumcision or no circumcision.

Well, on to other more important issues.

Jack

[Adele Edisen]

For those interested. Posted elsewhere in 2008.

Title: SUMMARY OF KNOWN FACTS REGARDING JOSE RIVERA

Post by: aedisen on July 10, 2008, 11:51 PM

________________________________________

SUMMARY OF KNOWN FACTS REGARDING JOSE RIVERA

by Dave Robertson, 2002

Jose A Rivera was a naturalized citizen, born in either Lima, Peru, or San Juan, Puerto Rico (both birth places given in U.S. government documents, as are several different birth dates, ranging from February 6, 1905-1911. He died in 1989.). He was in the US. Army, 1943-1957 and US. Army Reserves, until 1965, Military Service Number: 05 13 618; served in the European Theater of War, 1943-1946; was stationed at Fort Detrick, Maryland, US. Army Chemical Corps, had SECRET Clearance, worked under Dr. Carl Lamanna, bacteriologist, 1947-1948; Stationed in Japan and Korea, 1950-1954; Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, Texas, 1954-1957; Loyola University, New Orleans, Louisiana, 1959-1961; Naval Biological Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, CA, had TOP SECRET classification work under Dr. Carl Lamanna again, 1959-1961. National Institute of Neurological Disease and Blindness, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, Science Administrator, 1961-1973 (?) uncertain of exact retirement date here.

Adele Edisen first met him in April of 1963 while attending scientific meetings in Atlantic City, New Jersey (Federation of American Societies of Experimental Biology - FASEB). She was a Postdoctoral Fellow of the National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Blindness - NIH at that time. Rivera was an administrator in the same Institute as a member of the Section on Training Grants and Awards. He had previously informed Dr. Sidney Harris, Chairman of the Department of Physiology, Louisiana State University School of Medicine, that Adele Edisen had been awarded the fellowship to work in the department.

*Birth dates: February 6, 1905-1912 (range).

*US. Army: 1943-1957; Army Reserve unti1 1965. Military Service Number: 05 13 618.

*European Theater of War: 1943-1946.

*Stationed at Fort Detrick, Maryland, U.S. Army Chemical Corps, had SECRET Clearance, worked under Dr. Carl Lamanna, bacteriologist: 1947-1948.

*Stationed in Japan and Korea: 1950-1954.

*Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, Texas: 1954-1957.

*Loyola University, New Orleans, Louisiana: 1959-1961.

*Naval Biological Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, California,

had TOP SECRET classification working under Dr. Carl Lamanna again: 1959-1961.

*National Institute of Neurological Disease and Blindness, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, Science Administrator: 1961-1973 (?) uncertain of exact retirement date here.

*Social Security Number 214-28-5673.

He was a naturalized citizen. Claimed two birth places -Lima, Peru, and San Juan, Puerto Rico. Graduated Lima High School in 1925. Graduated St. John's University Brooklyn, New York with B.S. degree in 1934.

Note added by Adele Edisen::

Jose Rivera is listed as having been present at the autopsy of the body of President Kennedy on Friday evening, November 22, 1963, at Bethesda Naval Hospital in Bethesda, Maryland.

The NPRC list was compiled by Michael Ravnitzky. Bill Kelly told me in an e-mail that he had contacted Mr. Ravnitzky and asked about the note associated with Rivera's name. It was copied directly from the National Personnel Records Center Military listing. The NPRC is a U.S. government facility.

Also listed was a Vault File Number (2308) for Rivera.

Adele Edisen

[Adele Edisen]

A copy of Rivera's complete government personnel file, from which the summary, above, was compiled by Attorney Dave Robertson, is in Box 18 of the Douglas Horne Military Files Section of the JFK Assassination Collection at the National Archives II in College Park, Maryland.

Douglas Horne was Chief Military Analyst of the ARRB, the Assassination Records Review Board.

Adele Edisen

Edited May 24, 2010 by Adele Edisen

[Jack White]

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!

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

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. 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.

<!--QuoteBegin-Garu BuellJudyth initially suggests that the 2001 email was perhaps invented. She maintains that she never used the americanwebworks address and later she questios the header. However+ eventually she acknowledges writing the email while mantaining that the circumcision paragraph was added or altered. But if there was an original email then why alter the web address or header? As Stephen Roy said earlier, Howard Platzman could perhaps settle this as he was copied on the email.

Judyth says that "60 Minutes" had asked her the same question in 1999,which makes sense, and if she has any evidence as to her answer to them I would be most interested in seeing it. [b--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Garu BuellJudyth initially suggests that the 2001 email was perhaps invented. She maintains that she never used the americanwebworks address and later she questios the header. However @ eventually she acknowledges writing the email while mantaining that the circumcision paragraph was added or altered. But if there was an original email then why alter the web address or header? As Stephen Roy said earlier, Howard Platzman could perhaps settle this as he was copied on the email.

Judyth says that "60 Minutes" had asked her the same question in 1999,which makes sense, and if she has any evidence as to her answer to them I would be most interested in seeing it. [</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Professor Fetzer has said that the matter is moot as LHO was "partially circumcised."[/b] I do not find this argument persuasive. It seems to me that Judyth, if her claims are true, would answer "yes" or "no" on the question and not both at different times. -- Gary Buell

Partial Circumcision. What a crock. I think Jim Fetzer would come up with anything to prove himself right. He's been far-fetched in the past when, imo, he said there was a beam placed on top of one of our satellites on Sept. 11 to bring the buildings down faster than free-fall.

Does anyone else think this is a possibility? Maybe some do. To me it's "out there." If you don't see things his way, he attacks you, throughout this thread.

Kathy C

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

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: