Jump to content
The Education Forum

Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile


Guest James H. Fetzer

Recommended Posts

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites
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. :o

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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...

Link to post
Share on other sites
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 by James H. Fetzer
Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Link to post
Share on other sites
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...

Have you considered the possibility that David Lewis was not being forthcoming?

Link to post
Share on other sites
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...

Have you considered the possibility that David Lewis was not being forthcoming?

Have you considered the possibility that Judyth Baker is not being forthcoming?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Barb Junkkarinen

post May 24 2010, 06:34 PM

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 :-)

Barb, Jack, and others,

I hope that everyone realizes that I am not overwhelmed or upset if some people do not believe what I say. I am a scientist, well-trained to deal with scientific issues with which I am familiar. Dr. Anton J. Carlson, called the "Father of American Physiologists" because he trained so many of them, always asked this relevant question of students for the factual basis for their statements or hypotheses. The question was, "What is the evidence?"

That is ingrained in my thinking, even in ordinary life. What, why, how? And, who?

When I ask a simple question of a person who speaks the same language as I do, I expect an understandable answer, a true answer. If someone tells me they were introduced to someone, then I assume names were used. I was told that she was introduced to Rivera by Dr. Alton Ochsner. If I am told his skin color was "white", and there were no other physical characteristics given, then the man, obviously, was not Rivera.

Rivera's complexion was remarkably dark in color. It was darker than "olive-skinned" and much darker than "ecru" or light tan. Human skin color has so many variations, depending upon the amount of melanin in the skin, carotene, blood flow, and as every artist knows, the reflected light which plays upon the skin at any particular time. Exposure to the sunlight and genetic factors, as well as pathological factors, determine skin tones.

Now, on to Barb's question concerning the e-mail letters attributed to me. Let me ask everyone if they have ever received an e-mail letter from someone else, either addressed directly to them, or copied to them, or forwarded to them, in their mail box, which contained all that routing information? I get an e-mail like that when I make an error in the e-mail address that I am sending to someone else, and Mail Daemon, as it's called by my server, kicks it back to me. Can anyone explain all that jargon on an ordinary e-mail?

After that three-hour phone call, the next day I contacted someone who had previously been referred to me by Mary Ferrell whom she thought knew a great deal about the assassination. I asked him if he had ever heard or known about Judyth's story. I related what she had said and her request to me to support her story, which I could not possibly do, as I knew nothing more than what she had told me. She also had told me she would come to my home to show me her evidence. He replied that he had never heard of her or her story, and thought it might be a fantasy, some kind of hoax. He also advised not to speak to her or admit her into my home should she appear on my doorstep. This is one reason why I never would have written the "gushy" letter to her, with the "gigantic internet hug."

I did write postcards and notes to all my friends informing them of the change of address from the street address to the post office box, but that had been four years prior to the date on this particular e-mail. I had sent one to Mary Ferrell because we had corresponded for many years by postal mail by then because I did not have a computer and was not online. Mary and I spoke often on the telephone, even after I did get a computer. I would not have had a need to tell Mary in 2000 that she should use my P.O. Box address.

So, go figure....

Adele

Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Jim:

I would request something very simple that would not involve the cost of having the LHO handwriting analyzed. You have requested a tape from Lifton. I would ask that you have Judyth provide you a copy of the tape of her encounter with Mary Ferrell in which her account posted in this thread differs significantly from other accounts of the encounter. Review the tape and post whether or not it is consistent with her posted account. There should be no ambiquity. There should be no excuse (stolen, can't find, has been edited by others.) This would be an easy first step. I am sure that this probably crossed your mind and you may already have the tape.

Best,

Doug Weldon

Link to post
Share on other sites

The veracity of Adele is unquestionable. Read carefully what she has to say.

The alleged dually addressed email happened four years AFTER her postal

change of address. Go figure.

Jose Rivera was VERY dark-skinned, not white, not Cuban. Go figure.

As a scientist, Adele does not write gushy girl talk. Go figure.

Jim, everyone else sees who is telling the truth here. Go refigure.

Jack

Barb Junkkarinen

post May 24 2010, 06:34 PM

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 :-)

Barb, Jack, and others,

I hope that everyone realizes that I am not overwhelmed or upset if some people do not believe what I say. I am a scientist, well-trained to deal with scientific issues with which I am familiar. Dr. Anton J. Carlson, called the "Father of American Physiologists" because he trained so many of them, always asked this relevant question of students for the factual basis for their statements or hypotheses. The question was, "What is the evidence?"

That is ingrained in my thinking, even in ordinary life. What, why, how? And, who?

When I ask a simple question of a person who speaks the same language as I do, I expect an understandable answer, a true answer. If someone tells me they were introduced to someone, then I assume names were used. I was told that she was introduced to Rivera by Dr. Alton Ochsner. If I am told his skin color was "white", and there were no other physical characteristics given, then the man, obviously, was not Rivera.

Rivera's complexion was remarkably dark in color. It was darker than "olive-skinned" and much darker than "ecru" or light tan. Human skin color has so many variations, depending upon the amount of melanin in the skin, carotene, blood flow, and as every artist knows, the reflected light which plays upon the skin at any particular time. Exposure to the sunlight and genetic factors, as well as pathological factors, determine skin tones.

Now, on to Barb's question concerning the e-mail letters attributed to me. Let me ask everyone if they have ever received an e-mail letter from someone else, either addressed directly to them, or copied to them, or forwarded to them, in their mail box, which contained all that routing information? I get an e-mail like that when I make an error in the e-mail address that I am sending to someone else, and Mail Daemon, as it's called by my server, kicks it back to me. Can anyone explain all that jargon on an ordinary e-mail?

After that three-hour phone call, the next day I contacted someone who had previously been referred to me by Mary Ferrell whom she thought knew a great deal about the assassination. I asked him if he had ever heard or known about Judyth's story. I related what she had said and her request to me to support her story, which I could not possibly do, as I knew nothing more than what she had told me. She also had told me she would come to my home to show me her evidence. He replied that he had never heard of her or her story, and thought it might be a fantasy, some kind of hoax. He also advised not to speak to her or admit her into my home should she appear on my doorstep. This is one reason why I never would have written the "gushy" letter to her, with the "gigantic internet hug."

I did write postcards and notes to all my friends informing them of the change of address from the street address to the post office box, but that had been four years prior to the date on this particular e-mail. I had sent one to Mary Ferrell because we had corresponded for many years by postal mail by then because I did not have a computer and was not online. Mary and I spoke often on the telephone, even after I did get a computer. I would not have had a need to tell Mary in 2000 that she should use my P.O. Box address.

So, go figure....

Adele

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...