Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

Greg Burnham · March 15, 2010

...I agree with you that "I AM HAVING A HARD TIME KEEPING ALL OF THIS STRAIGHT". It is difficult
to hit a moving target.

Warm regards.

Jack

I agree, Jack. That is exactly the main reason I couldn't thoroughly investigate everything Judyth claims. Here is a major part of my conflict, in a nutshell: Unlike most of her detractors, I cross-examined her in person, and as a result, I believe she is telling the truth as she knows it to be, and therefore, I am not a detractor.

Given that I am not inclined to be duped by her either, I find it both difficult to accept her story at face value or reject it without good cause. Because it is too large for me to get my head around completely, as it would take hundreds of hours, cost millions of dollars and take thousands of lives (just being a little facetious)--I am uncomfortably stuck in a position of limbo.

I have not been this torn about a "witness" in this case--ever. That is why I will not commit one way or the other--I simply can't tell from where I sit. I hope Jim fares better than I did.

GO_SECURE

monk

March 16, 2010

This is a nice example of Junkkarinen missing the boat completely.

The question is not whether Lee had a small scar on his lip, which

is indeed something that one could learn from his autopsy report.

The question is how he acquired the scar. I spent three hours watching

James Files being interviewed by Jim Marrs and Wim Dankbaar and, as

Judyth is aware, he explained the story of how Lee acquired the scar.

If Junkkarinen has no more understanding than she is displaying here,

then I think the time has come to fold her tent. No one was taking about

HAVING THE SCAR. The issue was KNOWING HOW HE HAD ACQUIRED IT.

(2) JUDYTH TALKS ABOUT DAVID ATLEE PHILLIPS

LEE TOLD ME THAT DAVID ATLEE PHILLIPS WAS THE ONE WHO MASTERMINDED MUCH OF THE

ASSASSINATION OF JOHN F. KENNEDY. HE TOLD ME THAT PHILLIPS AND OTHERS WOULD BE PRESENT

TO WATCH JFK GO DOWN. ADDITIONAL DETAILS ARE IN THE BOOK.

An excerpt from David Lifton's conversation with Judyth.

On the question of whether Lee every met with David Atlee Phillips and whether

Lee knew Phillips by his real name; and the question of whether other employees

at Reily knew Phillips by either or both names ("Bishop" or Phillips), here's what

Judyth told me on March 4, 2000:

QUOTE ON:

JVB: What I simply want to do. . I want you to know that [Oswald] is an

innocent man; this is a man who had a chance to get out of this thing, and

he stuck it out. OK? He stuck it out. Of course, he wanted to get out

alive, and all that, but that is not the point, but he, [starts to get upset] he

knew that; [pause, starts to cry--dsl] he knew, we knew things were really

bad when Phillips didn't show up.

He told me, [recovers; now sounds cheerful-DSL] listen -I didn't know

what David Atlee Phillips name was until our last phone conversation,

or maybe a couple before that. I can't remember. But he told me, to

NEVER forget his name. He told me, "never forget his name."

DSL: How did he know his name, by the way?

JVB: Oh, he met him. But, listen, I'd overheard, we'd overheard, I'd

overheard his name before, over at Reily's. They talked about a guy

named Bishop, and [someone] said, 'That's Phillips", and so I had an

idea who that was.

This raises obvious questions - and here are the questions David had for Martin Shackelford:

QUESTIONS FOR MARTIN SHACKELFORD:

1) Did Judyth tell you, as she did me, that she knew Phillips by his real name,

*and* by his alias?

2) Did she tell you that Lee Oswald knew Phillips by his real name, *and* his

alias??

3) If Phillips was involved in a covert operation that involved LHO, do you think

he'd tell him BOTH his alias and his real name?

4) IF Phillips was involved in a covert operation, do you think he'd have

anything whatsoever to do with employees at Reily Coffee-again for any reason;

but, just for the sake of argument, let's say he did.

Do you believe that he'd be using both his real name AND his alias? If so, this

has got to be one of the most insecure operations in intelligence history: not only

does the low level agent, supposedly working directly under the CIA' Chief of

the Western Hemisphere Division know both his names, but so does his

girlfriend! And, in addition, so do numerous others at the coffee company where

he is employed, oiling the machinery!

Indeed, David's last comment sums it up rather well, imo.

(3) JUDYTH TALKS ABOUT JAMES FILES
IT GETS SO TOUGH, BEING A WITNESS. YOU MAKE ENEMIES BECAUSE YOUR TESTIMONY DOESN'T FIT

JIMMY SAID ONE THING CORRECT, SO I BELIEVE HE MET LEE OSWALD BUT IS NOT TELLING

EVERYTHING AS IT HAPPENED, OR HE HEARD IT FROM SOMEBODY WHO MET LEE. LEE HAD

A TINY SCAR NOBODY NOTICES ON HIS LIP. WIM ASKED ME HOW LEE GOT THE SCAR AND

I TOLD HIM, IN THE MARINES DURING BOOT CAMP, AND EXPLAINED THE INCIDENT.

NOW, FILES KNEW IT, TOO, AND I CANNOT EXPLAIN HOW HE DID.

It is no mystery how anyone would know that information. It is in Oswald's autopsy report.

Midline, upper lip, terminating at the vermillion margin is a 1/4 inch pale scar.

NOTE: The vermillion is where the pink lip tissue and the skin meet.

Barb :-)

March 16, 2010

JUDYTH COMMENTS ON HER (NOT ENTIRELY POSITIVE) FORUM EXPERIENCES

Here Judyth reflects on the treatment she has received by certain participants on

these fora, where the objective often appears to be other than a search for truth.

Over a decade, these people brought up one subject after another to discredit me.

It began with asserting that I did not even work at Reily and had probably faked

the check stubs, as they had no name.

They tried to say the W-2 form was faked, but that very same year, I think, the

U.S. Goverment came up with company numbers for tax purposes. Those ID

numbers were brand-new and not available on the internet or in the archives.

In sort, it was discovered that the ID number of the company was correct.

So what did they do?

Anytime something proves to be correct, they drop it and go on to a new attack.

The next attack was that I was not Monaghan's secretary due to classified ads.

Long arguments later, they had to concede that I was his secretary, since I

produced Monaghan's private Reily stationery, which no clerk had access to,

since all they did was write bills and process labels, etc.

They dropped that and fixed on Cancun.

And so it went.

Meanwhile, they sent out their statements that I had flunked all their tests as an

ethical person.

The latest test is trying to discredit the very obvious fact that when I applied for

political asylum, an action I took to escape death threats in Hungary, I was not

immediately deported after they heard my case. No matter how many experts

they drag out, the fact is that I was accepted for consideration, and even got a

writ of inhibition, which is unusual.

That was to allow me time to find safe haven.

These things are spoken of face to face but do not get on paper or into official

records.

The thrust of this is to try to induce people to believe that I, at nearly age 67, have

decided (what, for attention? when I attempt to keep my locations unknown?) to be

dramatic by living overseas instead of in my own beloved country, with my children,

aging stepfather whom I love, and my grandchildren, so that I can persuade people

that I am a witness who knew Lee Harvey Oswald.

Does that make sense to anyone except somebody with some kind of perverted

thinking?

Why would my family make huge sacrifices to buy me a house in one country and

help pay for apartments and flights to other countries?

They know things that my internet detractors do not. They have witnessed what my

internet detractors have not.

My publishers know many details that they do not.

They do not want me to go to book signings, talk to reporters, or in any way risk my

life to publicize the book. Now, that's not the way publishers act when they want their

book to sell.

I ask you to look how Madeleine Brown was treated by these same people. How they

treat Jean Hill. How they treat Roger Craig, a person they also say has no credibility.

The dishonesty began openly when John McAdams claimed that Dr. Mary Sherman was

not a cancer researcher, just an orthopedic surgeon.

Then I realized that this man was not interested in the truth.

He was only interested in destruction of witnesses.

He and his crew have attacked me for ten years.

I ask the honest researchers to consider that:

1) I have lost almost all my worldly possessions.

2) I have lost the ability to lead a normal life without pain due to 'accidents' that hospitalized

me five times until I got the good sense to leave the country. (I returned twice, was employed,

and again received threats, harassments, and much more.)

3) Two of my children have disowned me. Another barely speaks to me and says she is ashamed

of me for having had an affair with JFK's 'killer.' She does not think that my husband's neglect and

abandoning me in New Orleans was sufficient cause to eventually have an affair with Oswald. She

wasn’t there, of course.

4) The only son who has helped me has suffered incredible losses, ever since doing so, beginning

with losing tenure at his university.

5) Though I worked as a social worker for twenty years and was known as a good person of good

repute, my character has been systematically assassinated. Employers would hire me, then receive

a phone call or email telling them to look me up on the internet -- and then I would be told they had

changed their mind...I cannot get employment.

6) I could not get a committee together to handle my dissertation. Only one person, plus a known

enemy who had blocked my being able to go to conferences and who had removed me from being

editor of a journal, who had looked into my past and disapproved, agreed to sit on the committee,

to defeat my dissertation, in my opinion. Nobody else would go on the committee.

I was told confidentially that I was 'too notorious' to be allowed to get my doctorate. I even changed

my dissertation to try to find 'new blood' but the new department chair would not even give me a time

extension, though I had handicapped status and was supposed to be allow time extensions. Thus, with

a 3.9 GPA and all orals, comps, classes finished, my second language (French) passed, I was told that

I was even forbidden to call myself 'an ABD' Ph.D.

This has been what I have gained from attempting to bring the truth about Lee to the American people.

Edited March 16, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

Jack White · March 16, 2010

...I agree with you that "I AM HAVING A HARD TIME KEEPING ALL OF THIS STRAIGHT". It is difficult
to hit a moving target.

Warm regards.

Jack

I agree, Jack. That is exactly the main reason I couldn't thoroughly investigate everything Judyth claims. Here is a major part of my conflict, in a nutshell: Unlike most of her detractors, I cross-examined her in person, and as a result, I believe she is telling the truth as she knows it to be, and therefore, I am not a detractor.

Given that I am not inclined to be duped by her either, I find it both difficult to accept her story at face value or reject it without good cause. Because it is too large for me to get my head around completely, as it would take hundreds of hours, cost millions of dollars and take thousands of lives (just being a little facetious)--I am uncomfortably stuck in a position of limbo.

I have not been this torn about a "witness" in this case--ever. That is why I will not commit one way or the other--I simply can't tell from where I sit. I hope Jim fares better than I did.

GO_SECURE

monk

Thanks, Monk. I agree except for one word. I would say THINKS it to be...not KNOWS it to be.

The reason is, witness' EARLIEST STATEMENTS tend to be most accurate. In the JVB case,

that would be what she wrote about ten years ago to her high school alumni newsletter.

In the past ten years, I am led to believe by those who have investigated, that she has

added MANY DETAILS obtained by research or added by those who saw "profits" in her

story. Now, ten years later, her convoluted story has many improbable twists and turns

added to shore up her original story. I believe she is now confused between her original

story and all the many added details from her own research or the research of helpers.

Example:

1. Went to NOLA because Dr. Ochsner offered her an internship.

2. On the second day she knew Lee, he took her to Ochsner's office and introduced her.

3. Now, in 2010 she says the doctor was in South America for two weeks, so Lee did NOT

introduce her as she had earlier stated. What credible witness would impeach their own

testimony?

It is difficult to hit an ever-moving target which bobs and weaves.

Thanks.

Jack

Barb Junkkarinen · March 16, 2010

(3) JUDYTH TALKS ABOUT JAMES FILES
IT GETS SO TOUGH, BEING A WITNESS. YOU MAKE ENEMIES BECAUSE YOUR TESTIMONY DOESN'T FIT

JIMMY SAID ONE THING CORRECT, SO I BELIEVE HE MET LEE OSWALD BUT IS NOT TELLING

EVERYTHING AS IT HAPPENED, OR HE HEARD IT FROM SOMEBODY WHO MET LEE. LEE HAD

A TINY SCAR NOBODY NOTICES ON HIS LIP. WIM ASKED ME HOW LEE GOT THE SCAR AND

I TOLD HIM, IN THE MARINES DURING BOOT CAMP, AND EXPLAINED THE INCIDENT.

NOW, FILES KNEW IT, TOO, AND I CANNOT EXPLAIN HOW HE DID.

It is no mystery how anyone would know that information. It is in Oswald's autopsy report.

Midline, upper lip, terminating at the vermillion margin is a 1/4 inch pale scar.

NOTE: The vermillion is where the pink lip tissue and the skin meet.

Barb :-)

Barb,

Not so fast. The scar might be in the report, but does the report state HOW the scar got there?

Nope. Files said Oswald had gotten hit in the mouth with the butt of a rifle in USMC training .... he said that during a 2003 interview with Marrs and Dankbaar. That there was actually a scar is not in doubt, and there's no doubt where anyone could have gotten that info.

That Files said it was from a boot camp incident has been available info for years. So who said it first, Files or Judyth .... both of whom are supported by Marrs and Dankbaar? And is the bootcamp report even accurate? Did Marrs or Dankbaar seek to confirm with any of Oswald's USMC buddies who had gone through bootcamp with him? Should have, imo.

I don't recall anything like that in Oswald's medical records, but I have not looked at them in years, and he may not have gone to medical anyway.

Judyth said she doesn't know how Files knew about that incident. Files said it in 2003. When did Files first become part of Judyth's story?

Bests,

Barb :-)

Edited March 16, 2010 by Barb Junkkarinen

March 16, 2010

PLACING JUDYTH'S EXPERIENCE IN PERSPECTIVE

I invited my psy ops expert to read the thread and

offer his observations about what has been taking

place on this forum. It appears to place Judyth's

experience in perspective in relation to TI patterns

of "Targeted Individuals" of intelligence operations.

Jim, I read all the posts. I do agree with what Monk says and I find his reasoning impeccable. Monk is a very intelligent man and has always expressed good judgement from what I know of his posts over the years. I also know where you are coming from and do not have the specific knowledge base about this matter to agree or disagree with you. But I can certainly respect your opinion and you could be correct.

To many, Judyth's story just isn't interesting from a raw evidenciary standpoint for the JFK assassination. It is no more than a human interest story to these folks and I can understand that. No doubt Jack White is a serious researcher and has made many astonishing and well founded research discoveries about the JFK Assassination and Nasa's faked moon landing videos. It seems to me that he has taken a perspective somewhat like Monk's, that most of Judyth's story is a personal interest story and is of little value to the JFK Assassination, although Jack appears to have concluded there are a number of contradictions in her story.

It seems to me that Jack has focused on some apparent contradictions between what others claim Judyth stated in the past and what she states now. And it seems to me that both Jack and Monk really think Judyth's story would not make any difference in a court of law if the JFK Assassination was ever brought to trial and the true perps were prosecuted for the murder and the coverup as accessories after the fact (by the way such accessory after the fact crimes are still being committed and by a fair number of intel ops in high places--don't belive me google the "black eagle trust" just for one of many, many long term intel ops--oops, maybe I shouldn't have spilled the beans on that--too bad--connect some dots if you want to).

It appears that Jack thinks Judyth's story contained certain things that have been shown to be a problem based on prior claims of hers. It is my understanding that Jack has a long history of being a very no nonsense, hardnosed, serious and very successful researcher who has little time for personal interest stories unless proven to be relevant and backed up by irrefutable 100% hard evidence, preferably photo or video. I don't have the background or knowledge of this matter to evaluate what detail of Judyth's personal story about her and Oswald is correct to every last detail or not, so I can't myself come to any judgments about the veracity of the details of Judyth's personal story. But I don't doubt that she is a long term TI for whatever reasons.

I can state without reservation that the way this matter has played out has all the fingerprints of a long term intel intercept op and a very sophisticated psyop. Where there is smoke there is fire, so what part of Judyth's history is intel working so hard to keep buried? And what part might they be working to embellish that would lead researchers away from what they want to stay hidden?

Usually this kind of op must be ordered and tracked by a single person at a very high level who was responsible for this operation right from the very start and maybe still is. In rare occasions a matter may be so important it is signed off or reassigned to another high level decision maker or small team once the original decision maker retires or dies. The initial decision maker would probably have to have been central to the JFK Assassination coverup and carry a great deal of absolute caesarian power and "with prejudice" authority. This key person or decision maker would perhaps have something personal to lose if this certain part of Judyth's story ever comes out and is exposed to international public scrutiny and thousands of researchers who have great resources and extensive investigative skills. One possibility is that perhaps a major investment this person or group was involved in and is still involved in would be directly jeapardized if that certain part of Judyth's story received too much attention. The key would be to find what this investment is in. If you doubt this occurs, try watching the following video on fluoride at the bottom of this post (this will give you an idea of how this works--skip through any boring parts): http://preventdisease.com/home/tips79.shtml

For example, what about the well-known little problem with the neuro-toxin aspartame (especially when heated in the sun) and how rummy got things well greased at the FDA for approval and got the negative studies buried.

And of course there are some real nobodies posting against Judyth who never made any major contributions to JFK Assassination research anytime in their lives and use the internet as a means to try to make their mark, to establish themselves as an authority (or perhaps to further an agenda being promoted by someone they are aligned with, whether they understand the game plan or not). These folks seem to always deliver an untruthful payload in everything they do, even though their initial approach may sound like "serious research". And it seems to be true to the following game plan, which is standard operating procedure, typical intel "sources and methods" trade-craft. This game plan is your typical "provoke and punish" strategy for discrediting and wearing out a witness. I'm not saying these folks vacationed at the dairy farm--Camp Peary--milking cows and working with pencil thrusts, lamps or "buses", but they seem to be following a game plan and are obsessed with covering up and obscuring facts of the JFK Assassination in other of their postings and so called "research" and seem to relish attacking Judyth's story.

It works like this: Go over the targeted individual's story with a fine tooth comb and then do it again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again ad nauseum, maybe as a team, until you find some contradictions (and there always will be some because TI's are human). Then using these apparent inconsistencies and contradictions, take some very hard specific shots at the TI's story at its most vulnerable points and do it in a passive aggressive but still insulting, discrediting manner which makes them feel attacked and demeaned as a person, while ignoring any suffering they have gone through while they have been a TI.

Then keep it up for years, and years, regurgitating and recycling the same old stuff, even if it was undone before once or twice until two three goals are attained:

Goal #1: Wear the TI out (individuals who are long term TI's typically are survivors and long ago made the commitment to survive and defend their story at all costs. (That's why they never gave up their story in the first place for for so many years, they are strong willed and cannot be cowered or shut up no matter what.)

Goal #2: Distract and shift the attention of the TI and others as far away from what secret you are attempting to keep covered up as possible in order to prevent a certain thread from being pulled, a thread which could unravel a current op which is an extension of a past op and is also very, very important.

GOAL #3: Keep this game plan going by creating "conflict points" and recycling these over and over until goals #1 & #2 are well attained and the TI is distracted from getting her story out (in this case completing her book which will probably sell fairly well since the author has some very interesting base facts already well established which set an interesting plausibility for her story).

I understand that Judyth has a very interesting story to tell about Oswald and her relationship with him which is important history, even if it is told from her own personal perspective based on her contacts and knowledge of him. I for one am not really interested in the personal aspects of it, but much more interested in the basic background facts of her medical research, and why and how she was selected for help with a very interesting medical research program. But I am going to buy her book as soon as ity is out because I want to support her efforts to survive as a TI.

Certainly it seems obvious that her very high IQ and her excellent HS academic achievements, along with an apparent very high aptitude for academic achievement made her interesting to certain parties many years ago back in the early 1960s, and there are always officials who are on the look out for the very gifted to bring into their pet programs. This is what interests me. I still believe that the real reason for Judyth being a long term TI is related to the cancer research she did and certain secret aspects of the medical research she was exposed to, but I may be incorrect on this or any other of my assertions. I just don't think so, however. I always root for the TI victims and I hope that Judyth attains real success with her book, which I believe she will.

Edited March 16, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

Barb Junkkarinen · March 16, 2010

This is a nice example of Junkkarinen missing the boat completely.
The question is not whether Lee had a small scar on his lip, which

is indeed something that one could learn from his autopsy report.

Ahhh, no boat missed, Jim. Not by me anyway. First there has to have been a verifiable scar. There is, as I posted. Then anyone can wrap a story around it.

The Files interview with Dankbaar and Marrs was in 2003. So Files is on the record with the story (whether it is true or not).

When did Judyth first relate the incident? Or did she just react to Files' comment with a, "How did he know that?" .... that's the salient question, imo.

The question is how he acquired the scar. I spent three hours watching
James Files being interviewed by Jim Marrs and Wim Dankbaar and, as

Judyth is aware, he explained the story of how Lee acquired the scar.

So you were there with them. Great, which of the 3 of you undertook checking Oswald's medical records or talking to a USMC buddy to try and verify the incident?

If Junkkarinen has no more understanding than she is displaying here,
then I think the time has come to fold her tent. No one was taking about

HAVING THE SCAR. The issue was KNOWING HOW HE HAD ACQUIRED IT.

The first question is if he had one. He did.

The next question is was James Files telling the truth when he described an incident during that interview in 2003.

Then comes the question of when Judyth first mentioned it to anyone. Before Files' 2003 interview?

When *did* Files become part of Judyth's story for the first time at all, Jim?

Barb :-)

Greg Burnham · March 16, 2010

Nope... [snip] I don't recall anything like that in Oswald's medical records, but I have not looked at them in years, and he may not have gone to medical anyway.
Bests,

Barb :-)

[above edit of original post mine]

That's what I thought.

March 16, 2010

JUDYTH REPLIES TO JACK WHITE REGARDING THE OUTRAGEOUS

JOHN WILLIAMS' DEALEY PLAZA ECHO ARTICLE DISTORTIONS

Dear Jack:

You stated,

Regarding the FALSE "CORRECTIONS" OF JVB in the previous posting, here

is the source, in THE DEALEY PLAZA ECHO, an article submitted to JVB for

her comments before publication. Obviously she has told so many variations

of her story she cannot remember which is the current version.

1) Jack, I simply didn't catch it where it says Lee introduced me to ALL

those people on the same day. . I didn't read it that way due to the way

it was formatted when it came to me over the Internet.

I saw it as if in a new paragraph and thought it was just the list of the people Dr.

Williams was showing that Lee introduced me to, beginning with Dave Ferrie--not

as all in one day. I miss some things due vision problems that others might catch.

Not a single written account on record before or since that I personally wrote ever

said such a thing.

The timeline I used to correct it has been published many times. You can quickly

verify the general timeline from THE LOVE AFFAIR, which is online at YouTube

(and at my website) that I was taken to see Guy Banister after attending a party

at David Ferrie's. The party was described as happening after meeting David Ferrie

in a restaurant. That was filmed early in 2003 and reflect my personal written records.

The rest of the corrections were FIXING YOUR ERRORS.

TO WIT:

2) I corrected 'evicted'; because you did not add 'due to a police raid' and that

cast aspersions on my character to some degree....as if had been evicted perhaps

for not paying rent, or whatever...Why didn't you take the time to type out the rest of

that line so people wuld not think badly of me, and realize it was a very tramatic event?

In fact, it made Lee Oswald a rescuer in my mind.

3) You also failed, for some reason, to mention the placement of the ad that connected

me to Lee Owald's firing. Why did you omit this information? It sows a unique link to

Oswald: they wanted to terminate me the same day he was terminated.

Quote: "July 19: The day Oswald was fired at Reily, an ad was ordered, which appeared

the following day in The Times-Picayune seeking to replace the secretary for Reily’s

Vice President, William Monaghan..."

4) Surprisingly to me, you distorted information by saying Oswald found me a 'room.'

There is a considerable difference between a room and an apartment. You reduced

the value of the information. Oswald did me a considerable favor, which was reduced

in value by your loose reportage of the facts:

Here is the actual quote:

May 4: By afternoon, Lee helped Judyth move into an apartment at 1032 Marengo,

within walking distance from an apartment he said he was going to take for himself

soon thereafter

5) You went on to show the date I was terminated, August 9th, without showing the

readers here the link to the fact that I was terminated for being seen with Oswald...

who was also arrested on Aug. 9th...

"August 9: Judyth was terminated by Reily Coffee, the day she is seen with Oswald

as he was passing out pro-Castro leaflets. [25]"

Why dId you leave that out?

Though Dr. Williams establishes statistical evaluations, in his capacity as a Ph.D. in

statistics, on this article, showing the probability that we knew each other at 99%,

you make it seem that our relationship ends with Reily. You ignore the matter of

Clinton and Jackson, etc., etc., etc.. A good researcher will not be prejudiced.

Your brand of reportage dropped important facts and skewed the truth ('room'

instead of 'apartment'--WHY, Jack? I am surprised that a man of your calibre

has done such a thing.).

I have admired your work for years and am distressed to see this apparently

consistent pattern of misreporting information--if it is about about me ---in a

timeline that is easily read by all elsewhere. I hope I have explained the single

error that I did not catch on my Hungarian keyboard computer, which makes a

lot of spacings that can make something look a bit different.

Worse, others can pick up your 'timeline' -- God forbid --and get the impression

that there are fewer links between Lee Oswald and myself in this matter than,

in fact, is the case.

That's called disinformation.

August 9: Judyth was terminated by Reily Coffee, the day she is seen with Oswald

as he was passing out pro-Castro leaflets. [25

Time Lines for Judyth and Lee in New Orleans, 1963

Judyth Vary Baker in New Orleans, 1963

April 20: Judyth arrives in New Orleans.

April 26: Judyth meets Oswald in front of the post office when Judyth went there to get a letter from her fiancé, Robert Baker.

April 27: Oswald introduced Judyth to (Dr.) David Ferrie, who was said to be a colleague of Dr. Mary Sherman, a noted cancer researcher. Oswald introduced Judyth to Guy Banister, who confirmed that Oswald was working on the anti-Castro project. Then Oswald took Judyth to meet Alton Ochsner, M.D., an internationally known physician working with cancer patients and cancer research. First Oswald went in by himself, and then he invited Judyth in and introduced her to Dr. Ochsner.

April 27-May 9: Both Judyth and Lee were instructed to read the advertisements for jobs in the New Orleans Times-Picayune, focusing on the jobs at 640 Magazine, with interviews with Mr. Alvin Prechter.

May 1: Robert Baker arrived; he wished to get married immediately, because he had to leave before midnight May 3rd to go to a summer job in the Gulf Coast area.

May 2: Because of a 2-day waiting period in Louisiana, Baker and Judyth eloped to Mobile, Alabama, where they were married. [23]

May 3: evening: Robert Baker left for his summer employment.

May 3-4 Midnight: Judyth was evicted from her rented room due to a police raid and found herself on the streets. [Times-Picayune articles for May 4-5 describe these raids]

May 4: By afternoon, Lee helped Judyth move into an apartment at 1032 Marengo, within walking distance from an apartment he said he was going to take for himself soon thereafter.

Prior to May 9: Judyth worked at a fast food restaurant, Royal Castle. She worked a total of 24 hours at Royal Castle. She states that her stipend for her summer internship did not start with Ochsner for another two weeks (she’d come 2 weeks early to New Orleans due to U of FL going onto the trimester schedule, unbeknownst to Ochsner). Therefore, she had to earn some money to pay for her rent at the YWCA, where she initially stayed.

May 9: Judyth and Lee were interviewed by A.T. Prechter at 640 Magazine; they were both hired and began working for Standard Coffee (a small Reily Coffee subsidiary) the next day. Oswald was interviewed first. Judyth waited at the A-1 Employment Agency until she was contacted by Oswald . The person whom Judyth spoke to wanted to know if Judyth got a job at the coffee company, trying to extract a payment for the referral, in case that Judyth got a job. (24)

May 10: Judyth’s first day at work. Judyth worked as the production floor secretary and credit research assistant for Mr. William Monaghan, Vice-President and Finance and Credit Manager of Reily’s Coffee.

May 17: Both Judyth and Lee were transferred to Reily Coffee. They were the only persons hired by Standard Coffee and the only persons transferred to Reily Coffee during that time frame.

July 19: The day Oswald was fired at Reily, an ad was ordered, which appeared the following day in The Times-Picayune, seeking to replace the secretary for Reily’s Vice President, William Monaghan. No one was hired until the ad was replaced later in the month by another ad with more attractive details.

August 9: Judyth was terminated by Reily Coffee, the day she is seen with Oswald as he was passing out pro-Castro leaflets. [25]

Around August 23-25: Shaw, Ferrie and Oswald go to Clinton and Jackson, LA. They wait in Clinton for hours and are observed by a number of witnesses there. Judyth: “They were waiting to join the convoy that was taking the prisoner/prisoners from Angola to Jackson’s mental hospital. There was an unexpected delay. Shaw used a leased vehicle – a black Cadillac---owned by Ochsner’s International House (where Shaw had worked with Ochsner for several years until 1962) and leased to The Trade Mart. I can explain in detail why the presence of all three men, and the orderly with them, was required at this time.”

After reaching the mental hospital as part of the convoy, apparently at least one person of Cuban descent is administered the cancerous material. Within 72 hours, Judyth was taken by Oswald in a different vehicle (an old car) to see the patient. Radical changes began quickly. The man was dead within weeks. [26]

September 1: Judyth left New Orleans, presumably to continue school. Instead, she merely does some artwork at the Craft Shop there until arrangements are made for her to work at Peninsular ChemResearch Laboratories near the university, where in overtime hours she creates materials useful in preserving live cancer cells in liquid nitrogen. She is hired at “PenChem” despite the fact that she has no degree, and has taken only one course, officially, in chemistry. Note: Judyth has been able to prove the existence of dual records for the time she spent at U of Fl: officially, she received only a “D” in a basic chemistry course. In actuality, she had progressed through organic chemistry and had studied biochemistry, which is why she was able to be hired at PenChem and was allowed to work overtime hours there. (Ref: college transcript, 2005, from U of FL records, shows existence of two concurrent AA degrees granted in 1965.)

Lee Harvey Oswald in New Orleans, 1963

April 24: Oswald arrived late at night by bus from Dallas; he had originally bought a ticket for Marina to accompany him, but Marina was invited to live with Ruth Paine in Irving while Oswald looked for a job in New Orleans. [27]

April 26: Oswald appeared at the unemployment claims office and was interviewed by John R. Rachal.

April 29: Oswald was interviewed at the unemployment claims office by Bob Hunley (an FBI confidential informant). [28]

Oswald moved in with his aunt and uncle, Dutz and Lillian Murret. [29]

April 30: Oswald telephoned Marina and told her he was staying with the Murret’s. [30]

May 5: Oswald visited the widow of his uncle William S. Oswald for 45 minutes. His cousin, William Oswald, son of William S. Oswald (whom LHO had never met) was then a route salesman for Reily Coffee. [31]

May 6: Oswald went to the A-1 Employment Agency, who referred him to Pelican Printing for a possible job as a photographer. He was not hired. [32]

May 7: Oswald reappeared at the unemployment claims office. He also filled out forms at the Commercial Employment Agency, who referred him to the Darrell DeMoss Company; Oswald never showed for an interview. [33]

May 6-7-8: Oswald and Judyth worked together to earn incidental money at Reverend James’ Souvenir Shop on Rampart St. (Judyth took a team of researchers to the site of this shop in Jan. 2000).

May 9: Oswald was interviewed and hired for a job at Reily Coffee. He also found an apartment at 4905 Magazine. [34]

May 10: Oswald began work at Standard Coffee, a small subsidiary of Reily Coffee.

May 11: Marina and her daughter were driven to New Orleans by Ruth Paine, arriving at the Murret’s at 3:00 PM. The group then went to Oswald’s apartment. Ruth Paine stayed for three days with them at the apartment. [35]

May 14: Ruth Paine left for Dallas. In Paine’s and Marina’s correspondence, Marina noted that Lee’s love for her seemed to have disappeared after Mrs. Paine left. [36]

May 15: Oswald went to the A-1 Employment Agency for Judyth, trying to get them to not charge Judyth for the referral. Lee talked them into accepting half of her first week’s pay ($17), instead of the customary full week’s pay for the referral. Oswald paid the $17 himself. As this was Judyth’s birthday, she considered this payment by Lee as a birthday gift. (37)

May 26: Oswald wrote the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (FPCC) to obtain membership, a FPCC charter, and a photograph of Fidel Castro. Oswald stated his intentions were to form a FPCC branch in New Orleans. [38] He mentioned planning to rent an office for these activities, and that the cost would be $30 a month.

May 27: Oswald asked Judyth to buy an American Express money order for him to provide a record of having rented an office for FPCC activities, as he has no bank account and wanted evidence of the transaction. Judyth provided Oswald with a $30 American Express money order (it is dated May 27) from money she and Oswald had earned at Reverend James’ Souvenir Shop prior to being hired at Reily’s (Oswald mentioned trying to get a job at a souvenir shop doing “lettering” to his aunt Lillian (Ref; her W.C. testimony).

May 28: Oswald repaid Judyth $30 in cash. Judyth deposited $30 into her bank account, which was recorded on her next bank statement. Judyth still has the American Express money order in her files.

May 29:The FPCC sent Oswald a membership card, but discouraged him from starting a chapter in New Orleans, because “...Louisiana seems somewhat restricted for Fair Play activities.” This did not dissuade Oswald from his FPCC activities in New Orleans. [39]

June 4: Marina wrote the Russian Embassy in Washington, DC that she was homesick, had family problems, and wished to bring her daughter and have her baby in the Soviet Union. [40]

June 15-16: Someone, likely Oswald, passed out FPCC leaflets to naval personnel from the USS Wasp, just docked in New Orleans; earlier in June, someone, probably Oswald, passed out leaflets at the Tulane University campus. [41]

June 24: Oswald applied for a new passport in New Orleans. He received the passport the next day. [42] Note from Judyth: “A former Customs Agent was brought in from Miami, Florida to help expedite Lee Oswald’s passport. Other passports were also processed in the same short time period to protect Lee’s passport from close inspection. I met this former Customs Agent on June 25 on the steps of the Custom House in New Orleans, and have described him to his living family members as having a German accent, silvery hair, and tattoos on his fingers. The man was Charles Thomas, AKA Arthur Young. Both names were familiar to the members of his family who were still alive. I recognized his face and saw the tattoos on his fingers on photos provided to me by his family. They also had photos of Cubans who were friends of his, in their possession.”

July 19: Oswald’s last day of employment at Reily’s Coffee; he immediately applied for unemployment compensation. [43]

July 23- until Oswald left New Orleans; he would leave his apartment each day around 1:00 and return around 5:00, according to the report of Gladys Rogers, who lived in the apartment adjoining the Oswald’s. [44] Note from Judyth: “The Rogers’ testimonies need to be closely inspected. They reveal that Mr. and Mrs. Rogers were placed at 4907 Magazine St.—the address Oswald claimed was his—and took his mail for him. Oswald and his family actually lived in 4905, but Oswald paid for the Rogers’ rent and utilities at 4907. Marina and Ruth Paine both write letters to each other using the 4907 address even though Mrs. Paine spent three days living at 4905, and Marina knows how to read Roman numerals. Mr. Rogers did not get a job until after Oswald left New Orleans. Lee told me that they were there to protect Marina, who was pregnant, from possible harassment by anti-Castroites, since Lee advertised his address as 4907 Magazine to the public.”

July 26: Oswald cashed his last Reily Coffee paycheck at a Winn-Dixie store at 4303 Magazine. The same day, someone visited the Atomic Energy Museum in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, giving their name and address as: Lee H. Oswald, USSR, Dallas Road, Dallas, Texas. [45]

July 27: The Murret’s picked up the Oswald’s and drove to Mobile, Alabama, where Oswald gave a talk on contemporary life in Russia at Spring Hill College; his cousin Eugene Murret was a student at the college and instrumental to Oswald’s invitation to speak there. [46]

Note from Judyth: “A contact, who was a priest well known to the Kennedy family, attended this important meeting, during which information important to Ochsner and the Samoza family was passed to Jesuit priests there, and information regarding Marxist-Leninist policies was discussed, along with Castro’s influence and increasing presence in Central and South America. Bobby Kennedy was personally advised of some of this information, and Lee couriered some information to this meeting.”

August 5: Oswald visited the Casa Roca Clothing Company and spoke with the owner, Carlos Bringuier, about his (Oswald’s) guerilla warfare expertise and his anti-Castro views. [47]

August 9: Oswald was handing out FPCC leaflets on the 700 block of Canal Street. Oswald got into a scuffle with three Cubans, including Bringuier. All four were arrested. Oswald spent the night in jail. [48]

EITHER THE DEALEY PLAZA ECHO PUBLISHED JOHN'S FIRST DRAFT INSTEAD OF THE DRAFT I APPROVED--EVEN THOUGH JOHN SENT ME ACOPY IN PRINTED FORM--OR MCADAMS DID NOT CHECK TO SEE IF HE HAD AN AUTHENTIC COPY. OR, DID HE GET AN EDITED JOB FROM SOMEBODY? HEAVEN FORBID THAT HE EDITED IT HIMSELF.

THE TRUE COPY IS ATTACHED AND DR. JOHN WLLIAMS IS CC'D TO ASSURE YOU THAT IT IS THE TRUE COPY.

Regarding the FALSE "CORRECTIONS" OF JVB in the previous posting, here
is the source, in THE DEALEY PLAZA ECHO, an article submitted to JVB for

her comments before publication. Obviously she has told so many variations

of her story she cannot remember which is the current version.

...........

EXCERPTED FROM DEALEY PLAZA ECHO

Judyth and Lee in New Orleans

John Delane Williams and Kelly Thomas Cousins

With Comments by Judyth Vary Baker

Time Lines for Judyth and Lee in New Orleans, 1963

Judyth Vary Baker in New Orleans, 1963

April 20: Judyth arrives in New Orleans.

April 26: Judyth meets Oswald in front of the post office when Judyth went there to get a

letter from her fiancé, Robert Baker.

April 27: Oswald introduced Judyth to (Dr.) David Ferrie, who was said to be a colleague

of Dr. Mary Sherman, a noted cancer researcher. Oswald introduced Judyth to Guy

Banister, who confirmed that Oswald was working on the anti-Castro project. Then

Oswald took Judyth to meet Alton Ochsner, M.D., an internationally known physician

working with cancer patients and cancer research. First Oswald went in by himself, and

then he invited Judyth in and introduced her to Dr. Ochsner.

April 27-May 9: Both Judyth and Lee were instructed to read the advertisements for jobs

in the New Orleans Times-Picayune, focusing on the jobs at 640 Magazine, with

interviews with Mr. Alvin Prechter.

May 1: Robert Baker arrived; he wished to get married immediately, because he had to

leave before midnight May 3rd to go to a summer job in the Gulf Coast area.

May 2: Because of a 2-day waiting period in Louisiana, Baker and Judyth eloped to

Mobile, Alabama, where they were married. [28]

May 3: evening: Robert Baker left for his summer employment.

May 3-4 Midnight: Judyth was evicted from her rented room due to a police raid and

found herself on the streets. [Times-Picayune articles for May 4-5 describe these raids]

May 4: By afternoon, Lee helped Judyth move into an apartment at 1032 Marengo,

within walking distance from an apartment he said he was going to take for himself soon

thereafter.

Prior to May 9: Judyth worked at a fast food restaurant, Royal Castle. She worked a total

of 24 hours at Royal Castle. She states that her stipend for her summer internship did not

start with Ochsner for another two weeks (she’d come 2 weeks early to New Orleans due

to the University of Florida being on the trimester schedule, unbeknownst to Ochsner).

Therefore, she had to earn some money to pay for her rent at the YWCA, where she

initially stayed.

May 9: Judyth and Lee were interviewed by A.T. Prechter at 640 Magazine; they were

both hired and began working for Standard Coffee (a small Reily Coffee subsidiary) the

next day. Oswald was interviewed first. Judyth waited at the A-1 Employment Agency

until she was contacted by Oswald. The person whom Judyth spoke to wanted to know if

Judyth got a job at the coffee company, trying to extract a payment for the referral, in

case that Judyth got a job. (29)

May 10: Judyth’s first day at work. Judyth worked as the production floor secretary and

credit research assistant for Mr. William Monaghan, Vice-President and Finance and

Credit Manager of Reily’s Coffee.

May 17: Both Judyth and Lee were transferred to Reily Coffee. They were the only

persons hired by Standard Coffee and the only persons transferred to Reily Coffee during

that time frame.

July 19: The day Oswald was fired at Reily, an ad was ordered, which appeared the

following day in The Times-Picayune, seeking to replace the secretary for Reily’s Vice

President, William Monaghan. No one was hired until the ad was replaced later in the

month by another ad with more attractive details.

August 9: Judyth was terminated by Reily Coffee, the day she was seen with Oswald as

he was passing out pro-Castro leaflets. [30]

end of excerpt.

Edited March 16, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

March 16, 2010

JUDYTH REPLIES TO JACK ABOUT A SIMPLE MISTAKE

NOTE: What is or is not "new information" to someone is a

function of the information already present in their minds. I

find it difficult to reconcile Jack's insistance that HE IS NOT

LEARNING ANYTHING NEW with the conclusion that THERE-

FORE NO ONE IS LEARNING ANYTHING NEW. I have been

offering examples about Ochsner, Phillips, and Files that I,

for example, have been finding to be "new information".

So I think Jack has been employing the wrong standard.

Jack writes:

To the contrary, it is difficult to pin down just what she does claim.

In 2007 an article for which she initiated the information for . . .

== I told Dr. Williams it would make an interesting statistical study.

He agreed, after reviewing everything. He worked hard gathering a

great deal of information. the article itself is quite long and involved.

It may have another flaw somewhere. I didn't catch the confluence

of several people being met in one day. NOTE THAT THIS IS NOT

IN THE LOVE AFFAIR, IT IS NOT IN ANY INFORMATION GIVEN TO

OTHERS. IT IS A SIMPLE ERROR.

and read in advance

===by computer! And it did not prnt out like it does on paper. The

layout of the next sentence fooled me. The rest of the article still

looks ok to me, with dozens and dozens of additional statements.====

says that the second day she had known LHO, he took her to meet Dr.

Ochsner; that she waited in the outer office while Lee went in, and that

he came out and took her in and introduced her to the doctor.

Now, in 2010, she says that is wrong...that he was in South America at

that time.

MR. WHITE IS IN ERROR. IN THE SAME ARTICLE THAT HE REFERS TO,

BUT APPARENTLY DID NOT READ CAREFULLY, IT SAYS THE FOLLOWING

ON PAGE 3:

"When I came to New Orleans two weeks early, both Ochsner and Sherman

were out of town, and I found myself temporarily stranded. My fiancé had

offered to come to New Orleans to marry me if he could convince his parents

to allow him to work away from their real estate office. "

SHORTLY AFTER DR. WILLIAMS PUBLISHED HIS ARTICLE, WE FOUND PROOF

THAT DR. OCHSNER WAS IN SOUTH AMERICA. I ONLY COULD PROVE THAT

HE WAS OUT OF TOWN BEFORE WE FOUND THE TIMES-PICAYUNE ARTICLE

MENTIONING HE WAS IN SOUTH AMERICA.

WHY DID JACK WHITE SAY I HAVE CHANGED MY STORY, WHEN I DID NOT?

I have acknowledged one error in the article, but have shown that both

before and after its publication I have shown that this was an error.

I made an error in reading this article. And Jack just made one by saYing

I did not menton that Ochsner was out of town in tis article. But I did.

You see how easly an error in reading can be made, Jack?

Why are you after my flesh and bones?

JVB

Jim...You have your opinions and I have mine about what constitutes "new evidence" in the JFK case.
I have not read her "book", but have read enough "excerpts" to have an idea what she claims. In

all of that, I HAVE NOT ENCOUNTERED ANY NEW INFORMATION WHICH ADDS TO MY UNDERSTANDING

of what happened in Dallas. To ME, what she says either is not relevant, not new, not important, or not

believable...so I find nothing of value to any of it. It does nothing to change our understanding of

what happened in DP or Bethesda. The autopsy is still faked, the brain is still substituted, the

Zapruder film still faked. The backyard photos were faked to frame LHO, etc., etc. etc. Nothing she

says CHANGES ANY OF THE "SETTLED" FACTS.

You and others who choose to think the opposite are entitled to your beliefs. But that does not mean

that others must change their evaluations. I have seen nothing that makes me sit up and take notice.

To the contrary, it is difficult to pin down just what she does claim. In 2007 an article for which she

initiated the information for and read in advance says that the second day she had known LHO, he

took her to meet Dr. Ochsner; that she waited in the outer office while Lee went in, and that he came

out and took her in and introduced her to the doctor. Now, in 2010, she says that is wrong...that

he was in South America at that time. Previously I had read that she had been invited to come to

New Orleans to be an intern under Dr. Ochsner. Now if you can sort this out and make sense of it,

you are better than I am at interpreting conflicting statements. I find this (and many other things)

too confusing to sort out or bother with. And so what? Was Ochsner behind the assassination? Or

if he had ANY involvement, was it important? I do not get that impression from ANYTHING JVB has

said. Even if EVERYTHING she says is true, it does not enhance the things we already knew.

I agree with you that "I AM HAVING A HARD TIME KEEPING ALL OF THIS STRAIGHT". It is difficult

to hit a moving target.

Warm regards.

Jack

OK, Jack. I am going to ask Judyth about it. I don't know about
you, but I would have a hard time keeping all this straight. Let me

ask you a question. Do you acknowledge, given what I have posed

above, that what Judyth has to tell us--assuming she is "the real deal",

which you dispute--DOES ADD TO OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE CASE

IN VARIOUS REPECTS, such as regarding Ochsner, Phillips, and Files?

Here is the Williams 2007 DP ECHO article. I am using the
McAdams reprinting of it, since it is much easier to read

as a PDF file rather than the small type in the ECHO

article:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ngarchive/Judya...nNewOrleans.pdf

Much of it differs from what JVB says in 2010.

Edited March 16, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

March 16, 2010

THE ONLY CONFLICT LIES IN YOUR PREJUDICE, JACK!

NOTE: I think that Judyth makes excellent points, Jack.

I am sorry to have to say I agree with her completely!

Dear Jack:

We have established the following:

1) I made a reading error that resulted in Banister and Ochsner being mentioned

on the wrong date. I supplied evidence that my correction matched what is easly

available online and that I had misinterpreted what was there as a list, which was

unconnected to the date a few lines aove it.

2) I pointed out that YOU misread the article yourself when you stated that I did

not mention Ochsner being out of town (South America). It seems you, too, are

capable of misreading the long article. I have shown you that Ochsner was out

of town and that it was in the article.

3) I pointed out that, for some reason, you have changed actual words, such as

'apartment' to 'room', and otherwise degraded information that is relevant to

establishing connectons between me and Oswald

4) You further left out connectors between Oswald and myself, such as mentioning

that, when I was forced to resign--yes, it was actually getting fired, but I signed a

resignation--it had occurred because I was seen with Oswald not long before he

was arrested for opassing out pamphlets--you simply didn't mention this connector.

By failing to do so, you exhibited a remarkable amount of prejudice in reporting my

position as a witness. I have been stunned, actually, by these seemingly deliberate

distortions of the record.

Now you compound everything with insults, such as beow:

Now, in 2010, she says that is wrong...that he was in South America at that time.

==We have alrerady addressed this, Jack--It says in the same article you supposedly

read that Oschner was out of town for two weeks when I arrived in New orleans.

Obviously, then, I could not have met him on April 27, since I arrived in New Orleans

on April 20. But let us move on to your insults and leave your errors behind:

Previously I had read that she had been invited to come to New Orleans to be an intern

under Dr. Ochsner. Now if you can sort this out and make sense of it, you are better

than I am at interpreting conflicting statements. I find this (and many other things)

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO CONFLICT. WHAT I FIND DISTURBING IS THAT YOU PASS

JUDGMENT ON ME APPARENTLY WITHOUT EVER SEEING THE DOCUMENTARY BY NIGEL

TURNER. IT IS CLEAR THERE--AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN CLEAR--THAT I WAS OFFERED

AN INTERNSHIP WITH DR. MARY SHERMAN BY OCHSNER AND THAT MY UNIVERSITY

WENT ON THE TRIMESTER SCHEDULE THAT YEAR.

WE GOT OUT TWO WEEKS EARLIER THAT OTHER SCHOOLS, BUT OCHSNER LEFT THE

COUNTRY, THINKING I WOULD ARRIVE TWO WEEKS LATER THAN I DID. SHERMAN

WAS WITH HIM PART OF THAT TME.

I FOUND MYSELF WTHOUT FUNDS. WATCH THE DOCMENTARY OR READ THE BOOK,

BUT PLEASE DO NOT PASS JUDGMENT ON ME WITHOUT HAVING EVEN READ THIS

ONE ARTICLE BY DR. JOHN WLLIAMS WITH CARE.

I AM SHOCKED AND SURPRISED AT THE CARELESSNESS INVOLVED HERE.

I CANNOT EVEN FEEL ANGER, JUST SHOCK.

YOU DO NOT CARE NOT WHETHER YOU DESTROY A WITNESS WHOSE TESTIMONY

YOU HAVE OBVIOUSLY NEVER INSPECTED. YOU HAVE RELIED ON HEARSAY.

IT GRIEVES ME TO SAY THESE WORDS. YOU HAVE DONE SO MUCH FOR THE

RESEARCH COMMUNITY.

too confusing to sort out or bother with. And so what?

THESE WORDS IMPLY IGNORANCE OF WHAT I KNOW AND WISH TO CONVEY

TO THE FORUM HERE--IF I EVER GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK OF THOSE

THINGS INSTEAD OF HAVING TO DEFEND MY INTEGRITY AND VERY SANITY ON

THIS FORUM AGAINST SPECIOUS ATTACKS.

I AM WELL AWARE THAT I AM HUMAN AND CAN MAKE AN OCCASIONAL ERROR.

BUT YOUR STATEMENTS BRUSH ME OFF AS A WORTHLESS PERSON NOT EVEN

DESERVING OF A HEARING. AND YOU DID NOT GIVE ME A FAIR ONE, EITHER.

Was Ochsner behind the assassination? Or if he had ANY involvement, was it

important?

AT LAST, A QUESTON OF VALUE.

I do not get that impression from ANYTHING JVB has said. Even if EVERYTHING

she says is true, it does not enhance the things we already knew.

HOW CAN YOU BE IN A POSITON TO JUDGE THE IMPORTANCE OF WHAT I HAVE

TO SAY, MR. WHITE, SINCE YOU HAVE NEVER MET ME, NEVER INTERVIEWED ME,

NEVER EVEN SEEN THE DOCUMENTARY, WHICH IS BASIC TO COMPREHENDING

MY TESTIMONY.

MUCH INFORMATION I HAVE DID NOT MEAN MUCH TO ME AT THE TIME. BUT BEING

THREATENED, REVILED AND ATTACKED CHANGES ONE'S PERSPECTIVE, AND I HAVE

DILIGENTLY SOUGHT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I KNOW.

I HOPE ATTACKS WILL STOP AND I WLL BE ALLOWED TO PRESENT MY INFORMATION.

YOU HAVE SPENT PAGES AND PAGES ATTACKING ME, WHILE REVEALING THAT YOU

HAVE ACCEPTED THE JUDGMENTS OF OTHERS WITHOUT RELYING ON YOUR OWN

HIGH INTELLIGENCE AND GOOD SENSE. SOME PEOPLE YOU TRUSTED HAVE QUITE

NEGATIVELY INFLUENCED YOU, JACK,

I AM VERY SORRY TO HAVE TO WRITE THESE THINGS TO A MAN WHOM I HAVE LONG

RESPECTED, DESPITE HIS UNENDING HOSTILE ATTITUDE TOWARD ME FOR OVER FIVE

YEARS.

IT SEEMS THAT "I AM HATED WITHOUT CAUSE" BY YOU.

JVB

Edited March 16, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

Jack White · March 16, 2010

What is emerging is that when an error occurs, IT IS ALWAYS THE FAULT OF SOMEONE ELSE.

JVB would have us believe that John Delane Williams made up his article as fiction that he

created without any basis. With no previous input using information provided by JVB, Williams

decided on his own, that on the second day of knowing Lee, that Lee took her to the office of

Doctor Ochsner, and that while she waited outside, Lee went in to see the doctor, came back

out, and then took JVB into the doctor's office and introduced the two of them. Why would

Williams make this up? Where did he get the date? How did he know that Lee went in first

and then later introduced the doctor to JVB? This is extraordinary detail for someone to

make up and not expect the fiction to be noticed. Or did he not know that Ochsner was in

South America, and decided to just make something up to add interest to the story? Why?

Did Williams have ANY basis for writing his article?

I am disappointed that I am the only one who feels that Williams wrote information that

had previously been presented to him in some form from the JVB story. I am disappointed

that I am castigated for making an observation that is so obvious that anyone should see

through the sham.

Jack

THE ONLY CONFLICT LIES IN YOUR PREJUDICE, JACK!
NOTE: I think that Judyth makes excellent points, Jack.

I am sorry to have to say I agree with her completely!

Dear Jack:

We have established the following:

1) I made a reading error that resulted in Banister and Ochsner being mentioned

on the wrong date. I supplied evidence that my correction matched what is easly

available online and that I had misinterpreted what was there as a list, which was

unconnected to the date a few lines aove it.

2) I pointed out that YOU misread the article yourself when you stated that I did

not mention Ochsner being out of town (South America). It seems you, too, are

capable of misreading the long article. I have shown you that Ochsner was out

of town and that it was in the article.

3) I pointed out that, for some reason, you have changed actual words, such as

'apartment' to 'room', and otherwise degraded information that is relevant to

establishing connectons between me and Oswald

4) You further left out connectors between Oswald and myself, such as mentioning

that, when I was forced to resign--yes, it was actually getting fired, but I signed a

resignation--it had occurred because I was seen with Oswald not long before he

was arrested for opassing out pamphlets--you simply didn't mention this connector.

By failing to do so, you exhibited a remarkable amount of prejudice in reporting my

position as a witness. I have been stunned, actually, by these seemingly deliberate

distortions of the record.

Now you compound everything with insults, such as beow:

Now, in 2010, she says that is wrong...that he was in South America at that time.

==We have alrerady addressed this, Jack--It says in the same article you supposedly

read that Oschner was out of town for two weeks when I arrived in New orleans.

Obviously, then, I could not have met him on April 27, since I arrived in New Orleans

on April 20. But let us move on to your insults and leave your errors behind:

Previously I had read that she had been invited to come to New Orleans to be an intern

under Dr. Ochsner. Now if you can sort this out and make sense of it, you are better

than I am at interpreting conflicting statements. I find this (and many other things)

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO CONFLICT. WHAT I FIND DISTURBING IS THAT YOU PASS

JUDGMENT ON ME APPARENTLY WITHOUT EVER SEEING THE DOCUMENTARY BY NIGEL

TURNER. IT IS CLEAR THERE--AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN CLEAR--THAT I WAS OFFERED

AN INTERNSHIP WITH DR. MARY SHERMAN BY OCHSNER AND THAT MY UNIVERSITY

WENT ON THE TRIMESTER SCHEDULE THAT YEAR.

WE GOT OUT TWO WEEKS EARLIER THAT OTHER SCHOOLS, BUT OCHSNER LEFT THE

COUNTRY, THINKING I WOULD ARRIVE TWO WEEKS LATER THAN I DID. SHERMAN

WAS WITH HIM PART OF THAT TME.

I FOUND MYSELF WTHOUT FUNDS. WATCH THE DOCMENTARY OR READ THE BOOK,

BUT PLEASE DO NOT PASS JUDGMENT ON ME WITHOUT HAVING EVEN READ THIS

ONE ARTICLE BY DR. JOHN WLLIAMS WITH CARE.

I AM SHOCKED AND SURPRISED AT THE CARELESSNESS INVOLVED HERE.

I CANNOT EVEN FEEL ANGER, JUST SHOCK.

YOU DO NOT CARE NOT WHETHER YOU DESTROY A WITNESS WHOSE TESTIMONY

YOU HAVE OBVIOUSLY NEVER INSPECTED. YOU HAVE RELIED ON HEARSAY.

IT GRIEVES ME TO SAY THESE WORDS. YOU HAVE DONE SO MUCH FOR THE

RESEARCH COMMUNITY.

too confusing to sort out or bother with. And so what?

THESE WORDS IMPLY IGNORANCE OF WHAT I KNOW AND WISH TO CONVEY

TO THE FORUM HERE--IF I EVER GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK OF THOSE

THINGS INSTEAD OF HAVING TO DEFEND MY INTEGRITY AND VERY SANITY ON

THIS FORUM AGAINST SPECIOUS ATTACKS.

I AM WELL AWARE THAT I AM HUMAN AND CAN MAKE AN OCCASIONAL ERROR.

BUT YOUR STATEMENTS BRUSH ME OFF AS A WORTHLESS PERSON NOT EVEN

DESERVING OF A HEARING. AND YOU DID NOT GIVE ME A FAIR ONE, EITHER.

Was Ochsner behind the assassination? Or if he had ANY involvement, was it

important?

AT LAST, A QUESTON OF VALUE.

I do not get that impression from ANYTHING JVB has said. Even if EVERYTHING

she says is true, it does not enhance the things we already knew.

HOW CAN YOU BE IN A POSITON TO JUDGE THE IMPORTANCE OF WHAT I HAVE

TO SAY, MR. WHITE, SINCE YOU HAVE NEVER MET ME, NEVER INTERVIEWED ME,

NEVER EVEN SEEN THE DOCUMENTARY, WHICH IS BASIC TO COMPREHENDING

MY TESTIMONY.

MUCH INFORMATION I HAVE DID NOT MEAN MUCH TO ME AT THE TIME. BUT BEING

THREATENED, REVILED AND ATTACKED CHANGES ONE'S PERSPECTIVE, AND I HAVE

DILIGENTLY SOUGHT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I KNOW.

I HOPE ATTACKS WILL STOP AND I WLL BE ALLOWED TO PRESENT MY INFORMATION.

YOU HAVE SPENT PAGES AND PAGES ATTACKING ME, WHILE REVEALING THAT YOU

HAVE ACCEPTED THE JUDGMENTS OF OTHERS WITHOUT RELYING ON YOUR OWN

HIGH INTELLIGENCE AND GOOD SENSE. SOME PEOPLE YOU TRUSTED HAVE QUITE

NEGATIVELY INFLUENCED YOU, JACK,

I AM VERY SORRY TO HAVE TO WRITE THESE THINGS TO A MAN WHOM I HAVE LONG

RESPECTED, DESPITE HIS UNENDING HOSTILE ATTITUDE TOWARD ME FOR OVER FIVE

YEARS.

IT SEEMS THAT "I AM HATED WITHOUT CAUSE" BY YOU.

JVB

Greg Burnham · March 16, 2010

SNIP:
I can state without reservation that the way this matter has played out has all the fingerprints of a long term intel intercept op and a very sophisticated psyop. Where there is smoke there is fire, so what part of Judyth's history is intel working so hard to keep buried? And what part might they be working to embellish that would lead researchers away from what they want to stay hidden?

Jim,

What he calls "fingerprints" I call "a signature of sorts" (see my earlier misinterpreted post) -- both are, of course, euphemisms for the same thing.

Usually this kind of op must be ordered and tracked by a single person at a very high level who was responsible for this operation right from the very start and maybe still is. In rare occasions a matter may be so important it is signed off or reassigned to another high level decision maker or small team once the original decision maker retires or dies. The initial decision maker would probably have to have been central to the JFK Assassination coverup and carry a great deal of absolute caesarian power and "with prejudice" authority. This key person or decision maker would perhaps have something personal to lose if this certain part of Judyth's story ever comes out and is exposed to international public scrutiny and thousands of researchers who have great resources and extensive investigative skills. One possibility is that perhaps a major investment this person or group was involved in and is still involved in would be directly jeapardized if that certain part of Judyth's story received too much attention. The key would be to find what this investment is in.

For Judyth's sake, I am somewhat reluctant to post this publicly, but then again, sometimes there is "safety in sunshine" so to speak. IMO, this "initial decision maker" (or his/her successor) is at once both well known/close to Judyth and also beyond her suspicion, for whatever reasons. However, I am mystified that your friend said that this initial decision maker was probably central to the JFK assassination coverup. Upon what evidence does he base that assertion? I am "with him" all the way--save for that part. It might be true, but I wonder how and why he reached that conclusion. There seems to be no "investment value" for the initial decision maker nor for any group or team or corporation, at least as far as I can tell, in the continued JFK assassination coverup. That part "lost me" -- I just don't get the connection. I get the pharmaceutical, FDA, HIV/AIDS, cancer, etc. possibilities--just not the JVB/OSWALD/JFK/Wall Street part.

GO_SECURE

monk

PS: I did get the part about me being a "very intelligent man" though.

Edited March 16, 2010 by Greg Burnham

March 16, 2010

Monk,

This bothers me. I have explained in several posts that Judyth's story is highly relevant because (1) she humanizes the alleged "lone, demented assassin" and makes it very implausible that someone with his personality, social inclinations, sense of humor and other attributes--including working undercover for our intelligence agencies--would be disposed to kill the president rather than protect him and (2) as my psy ops expert has explained in four earlier posts--which you might want to read--he suspects that she is being hounded and harassed because of what she knows about cancer research and bio-weapons development, even things she may not realize are important. But then I made these points most recently in #375. What's not to understand?

Jim

SNIP:
I can state without reservation that the way this matter has played out has all the fingerprints of a long term intel intercept op and a very sophisticated psyop. Where there is smoke there is fire, so what part of Judyth's history is intel working so hard to keep buried? And what part might they be working to embellish that would lead researchers away from what they want to stay hidden?

Jim,

What he calls "fingerprints" I call "a signature of sorts" (see my earlier misinterpreted post) -- both are, of course, euphemisms for the same thing.

Usually this kind of op must be ordered and tracked by a single person at a very high level who was responsible for this operation right from the very start and maybe still is. In rare occasions a matter may be so important it is signed off or reassigned to another high level decision maker or small team once the original decision maker retires or dies. The initial decision maker would probably have to have been central to the JFK Assassination coverup and carry a great deal of absolute caesarian power and "with prejudice" authority. This key person or decision maker would perhaps have something personal to lose if this certain part of Judyth's story ever comes out and is exposed to international public scrutiny and thousands of researchers who have great resources and extensive investigative skills. One possibility is that perhaps a major investment this person or group was involved in and is still involved in would be directly jeapardized if that certain part of Judyth's story received too much attention. The key would be to find what this investment is in.

For Judyth's sake, I am somewhat reluctant to post this publicly, but then again, sometimes there is "safety in sunshine" so to speak. IMO, this "initial decision maker" (or his/her successor) is at once both well known/close to Judyth and also beyond her suspicion, for whatever reasons. However, I am mystified that your friend said that this initial decision maker was probably central to the JFK assassination coverup. Upon what evidence does he base that assertion? I am "with him" all the way--save for that part. It might be true, but I wonder how and why he reached that conclusion. There seems to be no "investment value" for the initial decision maker nor for any group or team or corporation, at least as far as I can tell, in the continued JFK assassination coverup. That part "lost me" -- I just don't get the connection. I get the pharmaceutical, FDA, HIV/AIDS, cancer, etc. possibilities--just not the JVB/OSWALD/JFK/Wall Street part.

GO_SECURE

monk

PS: I did get the part about me being a "very intelligent man" though.

Edited March 16, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

March 16, 2010

JUDYTH REPLIES TO JACK WHITE ABOUT

AN ERROR SHE HAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED

JUDYTH WRITES:

I can hardly believe what Jack White wrote.

Now he is slamming Dr. Williams, as if he were not a competent researcher.

Why the incredible hostility?

JACK WRITES:

What is emerging is that when an error occurs, IT IS ALWAYS THE FAULT OF SOMEONE ELSE.

JUDYTH REPLIES:

==I TOOK RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ERROR, JACK.

I MIS-READ THE MANUSCRIPT AND THOUGHT IT WAS JUST A LIST DUE TO SPACING ON THE PAGE.

==

JACK WRITES:

JVB would have us believe that John Delane Williams made up his article as fiction that he

created without any basis.

JUDYTH REPLIES:

==I SAID THAT I THOUGHT IT WAS A LIST, JACK. I HAD SENT HIM A LIST OF PEOPLE I MET IN APRIL AND MAY.==

JACK WRITES:

With no previous input using information provided by JVB, Williams

decided on his own,

JUDYTH REPLIES:

==LOOK AGAIN, JACK.. ON THE 27TH, I MET DAVID FERRIE.

THE REST OF IT WAS, DUE TO SPACING ON THE COMPUTER, I SAW AS A LIST.

IT WAS NOT DR. WILLIAMS' FAULT. I HAVE ALREAYD EXPLAINED THAT ELSEWHERE

IN THE PAPER IT CORRECTLY SAYS OCHSNER WAS OUT OF TOWN FOR TWO WEEKS.

THAT'S FROM APRIL 20 TO MAY 4TH.

A GOOD RESEARCHER CAN CONCLUDE THAT I DID NOT MEET OCHSNER ON THE 27TH

AND THAT THERE IS AN ERROR THERE. SAME FOR THE NAMES THAT FOLLOW, THEY HAD

OTHER DATES AND THAT IS CLEAR FROM EVERYTHING ELSE I HAVE SAID FOR YEARS.==

JACK WRITES:

that on the second day of knowing Lee, that Lee took her to the office of

Doctor Ochsner, and that while she waited outside, Lee went in to see the doctor,

came back out, and then took JVB into the doctor's office and introduced the two of them.

Why would Williams make this up?

JUDYTH REPLIES:

==UNBELIEVABLE STRETCH, TRYING TO INSINUATE THAT I WOULD CARELESSLY GIVE OUT ANY

OLD DATES AT ANY OLD TIME, WHEN THIS IS A SINGLE, DISTINCT ERROR THAT I HAVE CAREFULLY EXPLAINED IS OBVIATED WHEN THE REST OF THE TEXT CONCERNING OCHSNER IS READ.==

==HAVE YOU NEVER HEARD THE WORD 'ERRATA' BEFORE?==

IT EXISTS BECAUSE SOMETIMES A DOCUMENT CAN HAVE AN ERROR THAT NEEDS CORRECTING.

I WILL PUBLISH THE DOCMENT ON SCRIBD AND INDICATE THE ERROR AND EXPLAIN THAT IT WAS

AN ERROR THAT IN FACT CANNOT BE FOUND IN ANY OF MY OTHER DESCRIPTIONS OF THE TIME-LINE

OR IN "THE MEN WHO KILLED KENNEDY" DOCUMENTARY.==

[NOTE: In an earlier post, she observed that the time line can also be

found in "The Love Affair" segment of Nigel Turner's documentary. So

her explanation here is in fact one that she has provided Jack before.]

JACK WRITES:

Where did he get the date? How did he know that Lee went in first and then later introduced the doctor

to JVB? This is extraordinary detail for someone to make up and not expect the fiction to be noticed.

JUDYTH REPLIES:

==WHAT IN GOD'S NAME ARE YOU CLAIMING? THAT DR. JOHN WILLIAMS MADE THIS UP, JUST BECAUSE

OF ONE ERROR? WILLIAM HAS INTEGRITY AND SO DO I. THIS IS A RELATIVELY EASY ERROR TO CORRECT.

BUT CARRY ON, VENT YOUR WRATH.==

JACK WRITES:

Or did he not know that Ochsner was in South America, and decided to just make

something up to add interest to the story? Why?

Did Williams have ANY basis for writing his article?

I am disappointed that I am the only one who feels that Williams wrote information that

had previously been presented to him in some form from the JVB story. I am disappointed

that I am castigated for making an observation that is so obvious that anyone should see

through the sham.

JUDYTH REPLIES:

==ONE ERROR AND YOU BLOW UP AND WON'T LISTEN TO REASON. I SHOW YOU THAT

ELSEWHERE IN THE MANUSCRIPT IT SAYS OCHSNER WAS OUT OF TOWN FOR TWO WEEKS,

WHICH YOU IGNORE. YOU MUST TAKE YOUR POUND OF FLESH FROM A SINGLE ERROR IN A

LONG MANUSCRIPT--YOU EVEN MENTIONED YOU WENT TO A LARGER PRINT TO READ--AND

YOU CALL EVERYTHING A SHAM.

YOU EVEN IMPLY THAT DR. WILLIAMS, A FINE RESEARCHER, IS SOMEHOW AN IDIOT FOR

WRITING THIS PAPER. I BELEVE YOU ARE AWARE THAT HE WROTE NOT ONE, BUT TWO

PAPERS ABOUT LEE OSWALD AND ME.

WILLIAMS IS A STATISTICIAN WITH A PHD IN THE SUBJECT WHO WAS INVESTIGATING MY

STORY. HE DID A FINE JOB. HE OFFERED A STATISTICAL STUDY OF THE EVIDENCE SHOWING

THAT THE PROBABILITY THAT OUR JOBS WERE ARRANGED FOR US AT REILY'S IS A MILLION

FOR AGAINST ONE. WE HAD TO CORRESPOND THROUGH EMAILS, BUT HIS ASSISTANT HAD

KNOWN ME PERSONALLY FOR YEARS. YOU IGNORE MY WITNESSES. YOU INSULT ME WITH

EVERY POST AND ARE ALLOWED TO DO SO.==

JVB

What is emerging is that when an error occurs, IT IS ALWAYS THE FAULT OF SOMEONE ELSE.
JVB would have us believe that John Delane Williams made up his article as fiction that he

created without any basis. With no previous input using information provided by JVB, Williams

decided on his own, that on the second day of knowing Lee, that Lee took her to the office of

Doctor Ochsner, and that while she waited outside, Lee went in to see the doctor, came back

out, and then took JVB into the doctor's office and introduced the two of them. Why would

Williams make this up? Where did he get the date? How did he know that Lee went in first

and then later introduced the doctor to JVB? This is extraordinary detail for someone to

make up and not expect the fiction to be noticed. Or did he not know that Ochsner was in

South America, and decided to just make something up to add interest to the story? Why?

Did Williams have ANY basis for writing his article?

I am disappointed that I am the only one who feels that Williams wrote information that

had previously been presented to him in some form from the JVB story. I am disappointed

that I am castigated for making an observation that is so obvious that anyone should see

through the sham.

Jack

THE ONLY CONFLICT LIES IN YOUR PREJUDICE, JACK!
NOTE: I think that Judyth makes excellent points, Jack.

I am sorry to have to say I agree with her completely!

Dear Jack:

We have established the following:

1) I made a reading error that resulted in Banister and Ochsner being mentioned

on the wrong date. I supplied evidence that my correction matched what is easly

available online and that I had misinterpreted what was there as a list, which was

unconnected to the date a few lines aove it.

2) I pointed out that YOU misread the article yourself when you stated that I did

not mention Ochsner being out of town (South America). It seems you, too, are

capable of misreading the long article. I have shown you that Ochsner was out

of town and that it was in the article.

3) I pointed out that, for some reason, you have changed actual words, such as

'apartment' to 'room', and otherwise degraded information that is relevant to

establishing connectons between me and Oswald

4) You further left out connectors between Oswald and myself, such as mentioning

that, when I was forced to resign--yes, it was actually getting fired, but I signed a

resignation--it had occurred because I was seen with Oswald not long before he

was arrested for opassing out pamphlets--you simply didn't mention this connector.

By failing to do so, you exhibited a remarkable amount of prejudice in reporting my

position as a witness. I have been stunned, actually, by these seemingly deliberate

distortions of the record.

Now you compound everything with insults, such as beow:

Now, in 2010, she says that is wrong...that he was in South America at that time.

==We have alrerady addressed this, Jack--It says in the same article you supposedly

read that Oschner was out of town for two weeks when I arrived in New orleans.

Obviously, then, I could not have met him on April 27, since I arrived in New Orleans

on April 20. But let us move on to your insults and leave your errors behind:

Previously I had read that she had been invited to come to New Orleans to be an intern

under Dr. Ochsner. Now if you can sort this out and make sense of it, you are better

than I am at interpreting conflicting statements. I find this (and many other things)

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO CONFLICT. WHAT I FIND DISTURBING IS THAT YOU PASS

JUDGMENT ON ME APPARENTLY WITHOUT EVER SEEING THE DOCUMENTARY BY NIGEL

TURNER. IT IS CLEAR THERE--AND HAS ALWAYS BEEN CLEAR--THAT I WAS OFFERED

AN INTERNSHIP WITH DR. MARY SHERMAN BY OCHSNER AND THAT MY UNIVERSITY

WENT ON THE TRIMESTER SCHEDULE THAT YEAR.

WE GOT OUT TWO WEEKS EARLIER THAT OTHER SCHOOLS, BUT OCHSNER LEFT THE

COUNTRY, THINKING I WOULD ARRIVE TWO WEEKS LATER THAN I DID. SHERMAN

WAS WITH HIM PART OF THAT TME.

I FOUND MYSELF WTHOUT FUNDS. WATCH THE DOCMENTARY OR READ THE BOOK,

BUT PLEASE DO NOT PASS JUDGMENT ON ME WITHOUT HAVING EVEN READ THIS

ONE ARTICLE BY DR. JOHN WLLIAMS WITH CARE.

I AM SHOCKED AND SURPRISED AT THE CARELESSNESS INVOLVED HERE.

I CANNOT EVEN FEEL ANGER, JUST SHOCK.

YOU DO NOT CARE NOT WHETHER YOU DESTROY A WITNESS WHOSE TESTIMONY

YOU HAVE OBVIOUSLY NEVER INSPECTED. YOU HAVE RELIED ON HEARSAY.

IT GRIEVES ME TO SAY THESE WORDS. YOU HAVE DONE SO MUCH FOR THE

RESEARCH COMMUNITY.

too confusing to sort out or bother with. And so what?

THESE WORDS IMPLY IGNORANCE OF WHAT I KNOW AND WISH TO CONVEY

TO THE FORUM HERE--IF I EVER GET THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK OF THOSE

THINGS INSTEAD OF HAVING TO DEFEND MY INTEGRITY AND VERY SANITY ON

THIS FORUM AGAINST SPECIOUS ATTACKS.

I AM WELL AWARE THAT I AM HUMAN AND CAN MAKE AN OCCASIONAL ERROR.

BUT YOUR STATEMENTS BRUSH ME OFF AS A WORTHLESS PERSON NOT EVEN

DESERVING OF A HEARING. AND YOU DID NOT GIVE ME A FAIR ONE, EITHER.

Was Ochsner behind the assassination? Or if he had ANY involvement, was it

important?

AT LAST, A QUESTON OF VALUE.

I do not get that impression from ANYTHING JVB has said. Even if EVERYTHING

she says is true, it does not enhance the things we already knew.

HOW CAN YOU BE IN A POSITON TO JUDGE THE IMPORTANCE OF WHAT I HAVE

TO SAY, MR. WHITE, SINCE YOU HAVE NEVER MET ME, NEVER INTERVIEWED ME,

NEVER EVEN SEEN THE DOCUMENTARY, WHICH IS BASIC TO COMPREHENDING

MY TESTIMONY.

MUCH INFORMATION I HAVE DID NOT MEAN MUCH TO ME AT THE TIME. BUT BEING

THREATENED, REVILED AND ATTACKED CHANGES ONE'S PERSPECTIVE, AND I HAVE

DILIGENTLY SOUGHT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT I KNOW.

I HOPE ATTACKS WILL STOP AND I WLL BE ALLOWED TO PRESENT MY INFORMATION.

YOU HAVE SPENT PAGES AND PAGES ATTACKING ME, WHILE REVEALING THAT YOU

HAVE ACCEPTED THE JUDGMENTS OF OTHERS WITHOUT RELYING ON YOUR OWN

HIGH INTELLIGENCE AND GOOD SENSE. SOME PEOPLE YOU TRUSTED HAVE QUITE

NEGATIVELY INFLUENCED YOU, JACK,

I AM VERY SORRY TO HAVE TO WRITE THESE THINGS TO A MAN WHOM I HAVE LONG

RESPECTED, DESPITE HIS UNENDING HOSTILE ATTITUDE TOWARD ME FOR OVER FIVE

YEARS.

IT SEEMS THAT "I AM HATED WITHOUT CAUSE" BY YOU.

JVB

Edited March 16, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

Announcements