Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

John Dolva,

Are you using a false name? The only instance of "John Dolva" is

right here on the forum. Not even in Facebook where there is nothing.

Why would somebody use a fake name in a forum? Umm. After taking

a look, others have said they haven't seen a more rubbish bio in 45 years!

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...amp;#entry31206

So who are you and why are you posting under what appears to be a fake name?

Isn't it a violation of forum rules to be posting under a false name? And you

have nearly 5,000 posts? You're a very busy beaver! Just who are you?

Jim

In your mind, Jim.

[John Dolva]

Ah dear. My turn now is it?

Jim, I don't think you've been paying attention. Tell you what. I'll leave that little conundrum to you. The only member on the Forum I've personally met is John Simkin.

[Pat Speer]

John Dolva,

Are you using a false name? The only instance of "John Dolva" is

right here on the forum. Not even in Facebook where there is nothing.

Why would somebody use a fake name in a forum? Umm. After taking

a look, others have said they haven't seen a more rubbish bio in 45 years!

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...amp;#entry31206

So who are you and why are you posting under what appears to be a fake name?

Isn't it a violation of forum rules to be posting under a false name? And you

have nearly 5,000 posts? You're a very busy beaver! Just who are you?

Jim

In your mind, Jim.

Jim, while marching to the beat of his own drummer, John Dolva has never been one to repeat LN talking points, or attack others on this forum. He is, near as can be determined, a CT, with a particular interest in postal inspector Harry Holmes. He has no clear agenda, other than discussing the case. So you're way off in your not-so-veiled suggestion he is some sort of disinfo agent.

As far as your and Judyth's point that Glen has worked as a researcher on the internet, that may very well have nothing to do with his interest in her claims. I would agree with you however that he should at least tell us so himself--and that he should acknowledge his ever having been hired to research Judyth by an outside party, should that be the case.

Not that that would automatically destroy his credibility. Lord knows there are cops paid to research crimes, and writers paid to write books about conspiracy theories, whose findings are not necessarily tainted by their economic involvement. But he should let us know if he's a hired gun...

Edited March 17, 2010 by Pat Speer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Consider the evidence, Pat. He appears to be posting under a false name,

which he has, interestingly enough, not denied. He makes a massive

number of posts. He gets very cute in some of them, which are not

serious responses to research. His bio sketch is rubbish. The evidence

suggests that something is not right here, and your intervention has not

resolved the issue. Are you telling me that you know this man and can

confirm his name? Isn't it a violation to post here under a false name?

John Dolva,

Are you using a false name? The only instance of "John Dolva" is

right here on the forum. Not even in Facebook where there is nothing.

Why would somebody use a fake name in a forum? Umm. After taking

a look, others have said they haven't seen a more rubbish bio in 45 years!

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...amp;#entry31206

So who are you and why are you posting under what appears to be a fake name?

Isn't it a violation of forum rules to be posting under a false name? And you

have nearly 5,000 posts? You're a very busy beaver! Just who are you?

Jim

In your mind, Jim.

Jim, while perhaps a bit eccentric, John Dolva has never been one to repeat LN talking points, or attack others on this forum. He is, near as can be determined, a CT, with a particular interest in postal inspector Harry Holmes. He has no clear agenda, other than discussing the case. So you're way off in your not-so-veiled suggestion he is some sort of disinfo agent.

[John Dolva]

Hey Pat, I love the eccentric bit, I'd have a riot in Piccadilly Circus, but I think that necessarily goes with an artistic temperament. You're right, and you're absolutley right with regards to Holmes. I came at him in a very surprising way. I'd developed a technique to align frames depending on what I wanted to study and to my complete surprise saw something that made me look over my shoulder (Nixs rather) and there was the southern side of the Plaza, so neglected, and, credit Ian Griggs, perched overlooking it all was dear ole' Harry. At the time I was looking for any tracings cuased by the turbulance left in the wake of a bullet trajectory shown in a mist cloud of fine particles, anything, a shift in light transmission, any density changes, anything. But I was looking for it as coming from the sixth floor as I felt it should be easy to prove so. I didn't.

At the same time I have no formal qualifications ie no academic credentials. I've got this and that trade certificate, that's all. My research is wide and wierd in many cases and I do refer to persons people who perhaps come under the Hairy Pothead character /he who must not be named/ that all good researchers should say prayers for protection from. Some I've come to a conclusion are veiled crackpots, others earnest but wrong, and some in parts very good, and I suppose a sprinkling of something more insiduous, but generally: admirable in many ways.

edit add typos : hey Jim, I'll give you a clue. I'm me. (don't tell anyone I said so. It'll be a secret between us.)

Edited March 17, 2010 by John Dolva

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

More happy horsexxxx from John Dolva. There is a series of posts here--#453, #455, #457, and now #460--that are

the sort of thing that one might expect from a twit. I would observe, by the way, that my question of whether or not

you are posting under your real name has not been answered. That is evasive behavior that suggests I am right. The

remark that "I'm me" could be truthfully asserted by anyone. That is not the same thing as asserting--which you have

not done--that "My true name is John Dolva!" So the insinuation that you are some kind of "disinfo op" has not come

from me but from Pat Speer, who leaped into the fray with remarkable alacrity. That rather puzzles me. I like that

Vilkund and Judyth appear to have come to the point of having presented their positions and that Glenn in post #452

is disposed to let it stand at that, which is agreeable with me: "Fair enough, indeed!" But where does this Dolva guy

come off suggesting this is going to be a "Cuba did it" caper (see his post #450, "I'm inclined to predict that this will

turn out to be yet another circuitous and imaginative ''cuba did it'' tome") for which there is no evidence at all! What

Judyth has been telling us implicates the CIA in multiple respects, where clearly Lee was being set up for the purpose

of creating the false impression that he was a pro-Castro communist sympathizer. If a guy who has made 5,000 posts

on this forum can't do better than this, that is a further--and stunning!--indication that something is wrong with him.

Hey Pat, I love the eccentric bit, I'd have a riot in Piccadilly Circus, but I think that necessarily goes with an artistic temperament. You're right, and you're absolutley right with regards to Holmes. I came at him in a very surprising way. I'd developed a technique to align frames depending on what I wanted to study and to my complete surprise saw something that made me look over my shoulder (Nixs rather) and there was the southern side of the Plaza, so neglected, and, credit Ian Griggs, perched overlooking it all was dear ole' Harry. At the time I was looking for any tracings cuased by the turbulance left in the wake of a bullet trajectory shown in a mist cloud of fine particles, anything, a shift in light transmission, any density changes, anything. But I was looking for it as coming from the sixth floor as I felt it should be easy to prove so. I didn't.

At the same time I have no formal qualifications ie no academic credentials. I've got this and that trade certificate, that's all. My research is wide and wierd in many cases and I do refer to persons people who perhaps come under the Hairy Pothead character /he who must not be named/ that all good researchers should say prayers for protection from. Some I've come to a conclusion are veiled crackpots, others earnest but wrong, and some in parts very good, and I suppose a sprinkling of something more insiduous, but generally: admirable in many ways.

edit add typos : hey Jim, I'll give you a clue. I'm me. (don't tell anyone I said so. It'll be a secret between us.)

[John Dolva]

I like it when you're puzzled, Jim.

Don't deprive me of that, please.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

JUDYTH REPLIES CONCERNING HER CANCER RESEARCH:

FROM JUDYTH:

Here's the proof of the pudding:

Source:

Page 1  article:

Page 2  continuation:

Perhaps now people will believe me when I said I was sent human cancer cells to work on

at St. Francis from George Moore at Roswell Park. I was sent more such cells from Roswell

Park and other places at university of Florida, and that Ochsner, Moore and Diehl, all close

friends, guided me without qualms to convince me that it was okay to inject deadly cancer

into human beings at the East Louisiana mental hospital in Jackson.

Note that Dr. Mirand may have good reasons to try to say I was dismissed from the program

at Roswell, when I was under George Moore's lab and not under Miranda's direct control.

I objected and they destroyed my medical career for objecting. But I pay the price today in

insults, attacks against my person physically and emotionally, and I am so often lied about.  

Nevertheless, I said that 'time was on my side' --and it is.

So is God. These issues need to be revealed.

Think of what is going on today, behind the scenes.

JVB  

P.S. Consider going overseas for medical treatment, US citizens!

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

JUDYTH COMMENTS ON THE MEDICAL TREATMENT OF JACK RUBY:

Regarding the medical team brought from the outside into Parkland Hospital to "treat' Jack Ruby, who died some 29 days after admission to Parkland: I consider Ruby a murder victim there, due to medical neglect. The team brought in made sure he would not survive.

We have large volumes of ascites fluid withdrawal made very late, at least twice, showing Ruby was drowning in his own lung fluids. They could have withdrawn the fluid earlier and saved him agony. Knowing his blood clot risk, they failed to place elastic stockings on his legs, according to my interview notes with his day guard, Al Maddox.

Several of these doctors were connected to New Orleans originally--training at Touro, Charity, and Tulane where Ochsner ruled.

Further, the bioweapon was brought to Texas by Lee Oswald en route to Mexico City, and a clone of it was dropped off in Houston prior to his going by bus across the border. He was flown into Houston and never rode a bus there. The Warren Commission was never able to prove that he rode a bus there, but simply assumed he did not fly because he was 'poor.' (!!!!)

He had purchased a bus ticket to Houston, indeed--the same night, at about 11:30 PM, Aug. 31st, that we returned from Jackson, or the very next day. The ticket was purchased that far in advance so it would not be connected with the expected death of the victim(s) at Jackson who had been injected. He was supposed to leave directly for Mexico City upon receiving that news.

Lee H. Oswald waited with anxiety because Ruth Paine had to arrive before he was ordered to leave for Mexico City, for he did not want to leave Marina alone with June.

The ticket bought in advance was because he would have to "use it" as soon as the prisoner died. It would cover his actual trips to Houston and Dallas by plane: on the record, he would seem to be traveling by bus to Houston. That was not true.

Ruth Paine was delayed several days in Washington, DC, etc., where she visited her CIA-connected relatives, before arriving as planned in New Orleans to pick up the heavily pregnant Marina and June. Lee and Marina wept because he had told her he would probably never see her again.

This is in the book Marina and Lee, the official version that besmirches Lee, and one reason why my book is called "Me and Lee."

Ruth Paine stayed two days before they left for Irving, TX (suburb of Dallas). Paine took Marina to visit the French Quarter with the kids in the evening. Lee did not go with them. This is because Lee and I had been together in the french Quarter and I had posed as Marina there. Lee would not accompany Marina to the French Quarter because to be seen with her might have caused people, then, to wonder who "I" was. We had been there so often.

The book "Marina and Lee" provides much corroboration for my presence in Lee Oswald's life through many more such entries, and it is a book that should be at hand while reading Me and Lee.

In my blog, I intend to present the many instances in the 'official biography' written by McMillan, a CIA asset, that provide support for my own statements and for many events--such as Lee refusing to go with Marina to the french Quarter, Lee refusing to tell Marina he worked at Reily Coffee and saying he worked at Leon Israel Coffee Co. instead--a company located further down Magazine St.

Marina Oswald did visit Leon Israel Coffee Co. looking for Lee and realized he did not work there.

Lee and I were often in each other's company outside at lunchtime near Reily's, and he did not want Marina to see us together. McMillan calls Lee's telling Marina he worked elsewhere as "ANOTHER POINTLESS...LIE" THAT LEE MADE. It was not pointless. It hid a relationship that involved clandestine lab work and Lee's role in that.

After I left New Orleans, Lee was told to stop doing pro-Castro things and to just be quiet in New Orleans. He spent much time at home during this time, though he was often gone all day long, as well. He had to be ready to leave as soon as the prisoner(s) died.

It was eventually learned that the prisoner of concern was about to die. In fact, death occurred for one prisoner at 28 days after first injection.

The word came two days after Ruth Paine's arrival.

When that word came, Paine and Marina took off for Irving, and Lee took off for Houston. But not by bus.

The bus ticket was not used by Lee, but a RETURN PORTION of the ticket was used by his pilot, Hugh Ward, to get Ward back to New Orleans from Baton Rouge, where he had left the plane at Chennault Field, for it had been supplied to them by Schlumberger Co., who kept the plane at Chennault Field, or sometimes at Hull Field...

I have background files on these matters.

Ward was upset because his car was left behind at Houma when he flew Lee to Hull Field outside Houston for what would be a flight from there to Dallas to establish Lee Oswald as 'not' going to Mexico City. He used part of the bus ticket to help get him partially back again, and it would 'help' it seem that "Lee' returned to New Orleans when he was actually on his way to Mexico City. So many false trails were laid.

Sightings of Lee in Dallas occurred the same day he was supposed to be 'riding the bus to Houston' -- and one or more of these are correct. This was part of the cover-up to hide Lee's trip to Mexico City.

Of course the truth is that they wished to EXPOSE Lee as being in Mexico City to trap him as a patsy, but Lee did not know this at the end of September. He was content with impersonations also, as he believed they were created to disguise his true mission to Mexico City.

The WC could never understand nor did they ever look into how part of the ticket back to New Orleans from Baton Rouge was used--I may have a segment of that wrong as I do not have the files, but a portion of the ticket was used by Hugh Ward. Maybe another portion of the ticket was given to a kid for use part way also; I do not know which portion.

WHAT IS A FACT IS THAT THE FINAL LEG OF THE TICKET TO HOUSTON WAS NEVER USED. Lee himself never used any of that ticket--it was a cover for his trip by plane. WC could never prove he was on a bus to Houston and had to conclude, as said before, that he was too poor to have flown to Houston.

Knowing this, we then see that Lee, about to leave Houston by bus for Mexico, is given a FRESH SUPPLY of the bioweapon, for two possibilities exist:

1) Haslam suggests it is possible that Lee was fooled into handing over the bioweapon that was real, and was given a fake substitute under the guise that it was two days younger in age (shelf life period limited, this was important). It was then out of Ochsner's control. In this way the bioweapon was transferred to M.D. Anderson/Baylor.

or

2) Lee DID receive a true clone. If so, the bioweapon had already been transferred to M.D. Anderson/Baylor and was out of Ochsner's control.

Either way, the bioweapon got out of Ochsner's control and into the hands of Texas doctors.

Jack Ruby was aware that a LARGE BORE (painful) needle was necessary to inject cancer cells INTO THE BLOODSTREAM.

The silly experiments mentioned by Moore, et al, in 1964 newspapers about injecting foreign (cancer) cells into muscle tissue are red herrings for what the bioweapon was designed to do and how it was administered.

Injections into muscle issue always resulted in abscesses and did not work. This was a ploy given to the press to make it seem that any cancer injections they heard of in experiments with prisoners were not given into the bloodstream, into the lungs, or kidneys or other areas where the cells could move freely, and if the patient's immune system was compromised (as in patients with cancer, or (later) those with AIDS, or those exposed to too much x-irradiation, a SUPER cancer (not ordinary cancers) could take off and engulf the victim, with death in 4-8 weeks.

Ruby died 29 days after his diagnosis.

They later said he must have had cancer for a long time, but in fact, he was being watched by the prison doctors (at his peril) at all times. It was in prison that Jack Ruby was injected by a doctor from Chicago, who vanishes afterwards. Maddox gave us that information. University of Chicago had close contacts with Dr. Mary Sherman and others in the New Orleans project.

Ruby knew he was being injected with cancer cells because they did not inject him in muscle tissue but into the bloodstream, with a painful, large bore needle that would not get clogged with the invisible, but 'sticky' cancer cells. He had been to Dave Ferrie's...I have not gone into all details in the book about our discussion there, with Ruby, due to space problems, but the reader of the book will know the subject of cancer research there was brought up when macerated tumors are described sitting in a blender in Ferrie's refrigerator.

Ruby was aware of the details, such as how injected cancer could 'take.' He brought money from Texas to help fund the project.

Newspaper articles talking about injections into the arm, etc. make the doctors look like heroes. In truth, you are under no danger from a cancer injection into muscle tissue. It's rejected as a foreign substance. Only if it gets into the bloodstream and is not filtered out as, for example, if it grows too fast and gets lodged in the lung, uterine, kidney or liver tissues where there is a god blood supply but the body can't filter it out through the lymph nodes, and it 'takes root'--think how the 'foreign tissue' of a baby can 'take root' in the uterus--a very vigorous, enhanced cancer placed in the bloodstream of a person with a compromised immune system will take off and will be unstoppable. Note that recently in China, a doctor has been indicted for injecting cancer cells into the uteruses of women and giving many women cancer, for which he then received money to 'cure' them.

JVB

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?to...g34313#msg34313

Edited March 18, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Glenn Viklund]

Pat,

I see that you too, have some questions about who I am. And thanks for bringing those questions forward in a normal, civilized way, really appreciate that.

If, on day one, in a forum such as this, you are met by the following demeaning characterizations:

”highly dubious source”

”An embarrassment to fellow swedes”

”A spy”

etc.

How would you react? Well, on my part, I tend to become just little bit upset, not particularly in the mood to answer any personal questions. Especially from those same persons. And by the time my mood was getting better, the hysterical yelling really geared up:

”Government agent”

”Insider”

”breach of confidentiality”

”violation of privacy”

etc.

And by now it had just turned ridiculous to answer anything or to deny anything. If I had done that, I'd probably still be sitting here denying all the things I was accused of...And beyond this, I had the impression that the info I sent to John Simkin was sufficient, that there would be no questions about my person on top of this. That's also how I understood the forum rules.

But never mind. To answer your questions: No, I've never taken a penny from McAdams or anyone else related to the JFK debate. Or to do any kind of research about JVB. And no, I'm not part of any ”team”. Just as I contacted Jim Fetzer a couple of weeks ago, I contacted McAdams, back in 2008. I follow the JFK discussions, sometimes closer and sometimes more infrequent. I happened to notice, when reading in McAdams forum, that there was this very heated discussion about JVB, and that she might be in Sweden. I found that interesting and decided to see if I could find anything about her, whether she was in Sweden or not. It took me appr. 5 min to find an article in a local newspaper about her and a short TV-feature with her. I sent links to McAdams about this. (Little did I know what a mistake that was....:-))

At this point the discussions had become very, very intense, especially about this asylum thing. I made a few postings in the forum, and got instantly hammered by Pam and Tony Marsh. That, really was what triggered me. Up until this point I had no documents at all, but this was where I decided to get them. And up until this point I had more or less only corrected a few of their most obvious knowledge gaps of how thing are done in Sweden.

But the way I was treated for doing this, got me pissed off, frankly. A few days later I had received the Court documents and got a very clear picture of what had really happened. Which, of course, I reported in the mod forum. And by now, no one could have any doubts as to which side presented the correct facts. It happened to be those critical of Judyth and this is of course the reason why I was regarded as part of the "McAdams team".

If you go back and dig those discussions out, you will see that everything I said then, was correct. This time I've had to use a little more of the info in those documents, but apart from that, I've given the exact same story here on Edu.

And about the ”Internet researcher” ad: That's actually one of the few things Judyth got right; I did place that ad there, back in 2001. (She should learn how to separate Lee Glenn Viklund from Harvey Glenn Viklund, if you see what I mean... )

As I've stated here, I'm an economist by profession, but I also had some IT education in my younger days, lower University levels only. So, in the early days of Internet, businesses had no idea of how to use the net, how to search it or how to profit from it. I started a company, and helped businesses with those things, in the early ninetees. Did this for a few years then went on to other things, along the way companies more and more had gotten their own people to do this kind of work. Market research, competition analysis, strategy analysis, this type of thing. After having spent a year in London, I returned to Sweden in 2001. This is when I placed the ad there, it was aimed primarily at businesses, but I never did any work for any US company, or private citizen for that matter. The information brokerage business has since more or less vanished.

But of course, in the spy novel world of Judyth, an ad like that one was always gone get twisted and used according to her skewed purposes, that was to be expected. ”Confidentiality”, in JVBs world , must have got something sinister to do with spies, agents, deceiving or being secretive for the wrong reasons. In my world, the business community, it's something honorable, a recognition of quality. But those are things that Judyth have never heard of, I suppose.

Nowadays I'm mostly working with investment research, Canada and commodities in particular. (If you're interested, and understand Swedish , here's my blog: www.riksdalern.se)

Pat, I hope this gives you the answers you were looking for.

And for anyone interested in reading about the asylum issue in this somewhat chaotic thread, maybe I can have the pleasure of recommending a source path:

It should be an interesting read to find out how, and why, this:

1. Judyth Vary Baker applied for political asylum in Sweden in the early

fall of 2007.

2. This was denied later that fall.

3. She immediately appealed this decision.

4. This appeal was denied, in the early summer of 2008, and she had to leave

the country shortly thereafter.

5. Her judicial status during this entire process was that of an asylum

seeker.

...could be described like this, by Judyth, summer of 2008:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

>that is not true.”

Then move on to posting no 255, (Judyth, a week ago).

After that, posting no 451, (Judyth, yesterday)

And finally no 441, (my only version, yesterday)..

I did, it's very enlightening

Edited March 20, 2010 by Glenn Viklund

[John Simkin]

Ah dear. My turn now is it?

Jim, I don't think you've been paying attention. Tell you what. I'll leave that little conundrum to you. The only member on the Forum I've personally met is John Simkin.

He will now be really convinced that you are an undercover agent.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

MORE FROM JUDYTH ABOUT JACK RUBY AND LEE OSWALD:

NOTE...THE FINAL PHOTO OF JACK RUBY DYING FROM CANCER...

HIS MUG SHOT, HAS BEEN SYSTEMATICALLY REMOVED FROM THE

INTERNET...AT PRESENT, ONLY A COUPLE OF PHOTOS REMAIN...

THIS IS ONE/CONTRAST WITH HEALTHY PHOTO MUGSHOT. (I

am reposting this photo, even though I have posted it already.)

THEY DID NOT CARE HOW MUCH THEY MADE HIM SUFFER. THE

GOAL WAS TO MAKE HIM ALSO LOOK LIKE A CRAZY, DERANGED

MAN, SO NO MATTER WHAT HE MIGHT SAY, IT WOULD BE

CONSIDERED TO BE THE WORDS OF A MADMAN.

WATCH THIS YOUTUBE VIDEO AND SEE WHAT JACK RUBY HAD TO

SAY ABOUT THE TRUTH NEVER COMING OUT BECAUSE THERE WAS

TOO MUCH TO LOSE AND THAT HE HAD BEEN PLACED IN THE

POSITION HE WAS IN.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uccd4KSZ1tc

Ruby: Everything pertaining to what’s happening has never

come to the surface. The world will never know the true facts

of what occurred – my motives. The people had so much to gain,

and had such an ulterior motive to put me in the position I’m in,

will never let the true facts come above board to the world.

Questioner: Are these people in very high positions Jack?

Ruby: Yes.

I have stated unequivocally that Jack Ruby had known Lee since he was a child (watching him

play with other kids at some mafia family get-togethers and parties), and Lee remembered Jack

Ruby since about age fifteen in a direct and personal manner. When Lee's mafia-member, his

uncle Dutz in New Orleans asked Ruby to "take care of my boy, Lee"---but Lee refused to work

for the mafia and instead joined the Marines.

Jack Ruby had family. He had beloved dogs. He knew Lee and neverwillingly would have killed him.

He was forced to kill Lee. And it was necessary to get rid of Ruby before he had a re-trial. He was to be

moved from Dallas to a new venue when it was 'discovered' that he was ill. He had received numerous

'penicillin shots', which he said were cancer cell injections, by the time he was to be moved from Dallas.

Instead, he was sent to the hospital, where he died some 28-29 days later.

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

EVEN MORE FROM JUDYTH ABOUT JACK RUBY AND HIS DEATH:

There are actually a few years between the photos--but in fact, we do have the

YouTube photos in between showing when the Commission visited Jack Ruby.

Another file of interest:

In his book, JFK: The Second Plot (1992), Matthew Smith points out that Thomas H. Killam,

a man who worked for Jack Ruby, claimed that there was a link between his former employer, Lee

Harvey Oswald and the Mafia. He told his brother, "I am a dead man, but I have run as far as I am

running." Killam was found dead in an alley with his throat cut in March, 1964. Smith points out that

Dorothy Kilgallen also died in mysterious circumstances after interviewing Ruby iin November 1965.

Following the assassination, Rose Cheramie was interviewed by the police. She claimed that Lee

Harvey Oswald had visited Ruby's night club. In fact, she believed the two men were having a

homosexual relationship. Cheramie, the victim of a hit and run driver, was found dead on 4th

September, 1965.

In 1968, Joachim reported things differently than they have since been reported...we have heard,

ever since Joachim came out with the message below, that Ruby had at one time or another been ill.

But looking closely, we find that Ruby bashed his head against a wall, trying to kill himself, and tried

to electrocute himself--according to the police. His sister Eva said he was very ill a few weeks before

he was taken to Parkland Hospital. But that still means he was healthy until at least the end of October,

when all reports and records are examined.

Joachim's words have been challenged decades later. But Joachim, in fact, is reporting from 1968, and

has a closer view of everything than the cover-up artists who come along later. He wrote:

"Jack Ruby, on December 9, 1966, - exactly one day after he had learned that his new trial was going

to be held in February or March 1967 at Wichita Falls, about 140 miles from Dallas - was stricken with a

mysterious disease first diagnosed as a common cold, then as pneumonia and finally as generalized cancer.

For more than three years, with a death sentence hanging over his dead for most of the time, Ruby had

been as fit as a fiddle in the custody of Dallas Sheriff Bill Decker. At no time before December 9, had the

prison doctor who visited him regularly, detected any flaw in Ruby's splendid health. But now, with a new

trial in prospect in a different place, death quickly overtook the man who knew perhaps more than any

other living person (with the possible exception of David Ferrie, then still totally unknown to the public at

large) about the real background to the assassination. He passed away in the morning of January 3, 1967

- and another inconvenient trial was happily averted.

As always, my critics are likely to counter at this point with the challenge: 'Where is your evidence that Ruby was murdered?'

"The evidence is there, plain to see for anyone with an open mind, but it is purely circumstantial, not tangible. (The people who

arranged for Ruby's death, as they had previously arranged for the overt murders of President Kennedy, Patrolman Tippit and

Lee Harvey Oswald, to say nothing of the 20-odd witnesses who have also been disposed of, weren't stupid enough to leave

any palpable traces of what they had done.)" (from Spartacus website)

Edited March 18, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

TWO LETTERS FROM JUDYTH TO A RESEARCHER (#1):

Greetings!

By the way, Lee was a great-looking guy. I had dates with plenty of guys and had my pick, and would have picked him for looks that do not show up well when he was beaten and tired, etc. with their selected photos. But take a gander at the Midnight Conference...well, anyway, he had a lot of self-confidence and dominant ways, I love that. Girls like to have self-assurance and intelligence and a sense of humor.

McMillan makes Lee's self-assurance look always like bragging. Gag.....

Yes, it is true. My grandmother spoke 5 languages and knew Latin, as well.

That's not the point. The point is that the Hungarian family was due to marriage of John Pic to a girl born of native Hungarian parents. People then make phone calls and start their rumors. Police get these calls and reports and tips all the time. To accept every one as fact is shaky ground to walk on.

Lee knew not one single word of Hungarian. He knew Spanish better than reported. He knew his English as well as any college graduate, and it was Cajun-tinged. I've taken enough courses in linguistics to have a degree in the field, including plenty of doctoral level and graduate hours. Lee Oswald (Harvey) was a native-born Louisiana resident who effectively wiped out most of his accent. I have linguistic studies on Lee's speech and of his mother's to prove it. I interviewed 400 Cajun speakers in 1997-1998 for research on Cajun speech, as efforts were made by the US government to wipe it out. It was considered low class. Marguerite especially adopted a higher-class way of speaking, obviously sensitive to the idea that she was born into a Cajun-speaking milieu.

The point is to keep an open mind. There are too many other explanations. I am NEVER going to say Lee was not impersonated even when he was in the USSR. But this was to provide him deep cover protection when he returned. If he returned. He was a brave man.

About the Bronx photo: that is not a 'runt' photographed at the Bronx Zoo...He is leaning back against a railing that's three feet high. Also, kids can 'shoot up' in their early teens at a rapid rate...Also, nobody looks into the fact that there are tons of "Oswalds" in New York.

I know what happened at Stripling. Robert Oswald assumed Lee attended there.

I taught college English at U of LA a Lafayette for four years. Every semester--that's ten semesters--I had Oswald look-a-likes in my classes. Want to make a movie about Lee?

Go to Lafayette and all Cajun areas heading east from there, and you'll find 'Lee' all over the place.

There was a lot of inbreeding going on before they connected all the islands.

The Cajuns were rather despised and inbred.

Therefore, you have remarkably strong genetic resemblances among all three boys in their picture together when quite young. That’s inbreeding.

It also means, besides the commonality of the name 'Oswald" that you are going to have that same cute-looking boy all over the place, at various heights.

We must approach this scientifically rather than rely only on reports of people...I know I have been misreported as peeing in my pants in my English class due to fear, when it was mouse urine on the coat that I had tried to wash off, making the coat 'wet' (a raincoat, though) and a strong odour in the room when I had to go to class.

This 'pee in pants' was reported by a jock who hated my guts for taking science fair prizes away from him (he went on to West Point)....it got into an article in 2007. Nothing was said about the many, many friends I had who would have come against that statement.

I suppose in an alternative biography of me, they will say, SHE PEED IN HER PANTS, SHE WAS SUCH A COWARD. Yet that same guy added that I was seeking attention!

When we take every statement as fact, many errors can occur.

I knew that Lee was aware of and even wanted impersonations. We covered up our tracks very well and after Lee left Reily, I could never dare meet him outside there anymore.

Just trying to say, when you know the man, you know some things simply aren’t true.

Then it's easy to find what is true and present it.

Lee told me he even had a relative there. In New Orleans, two of his relatives were working for Reily when he was, and one worker describes a relative as smoking who was actually Lee, as Lee mentioned his male relative smoked.

People should notice that the boy is leaning back...the photo itself has been altered slightly around the nose ...as many other photos, as well...also, though this is supposed to be the Bronx Zoo, Robert Oswald has a fuzzy memory on a lot of stuff, and remember, Lee was visiting John Pic's home, not Robert's, in New York.

Robert has committed various errors and told lies as well, due to his affair with Marina shortly after Lee's death.

He 'found' the damning Imperial Reflex camera in the PAINE garage that had been so thoroughly searched...

Right after being caught with Marina....

Robert then moved into a nice new brick house that he could not have afforded before then.

Records get messed up, too.

One researcher, citing Armstrong (I have nothing against Armstrong except wonder that he did not interview me)--the researcher said Robert Oswald said Marguerite moved into a lower-class house which, however, at the time was a new house and was middle class, and nice middle-class, as well....There are other problems...

The way Armstrong describes things, ROBERT Oswald has to know about 'both' Oswalds, as he has photos of 'both' of them....

Edited March 27, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

TWO LETTERS FROM JUDYTH TO A RESEARCHER (#2):

Greetings!

There were other Oswalds in New York. Lee met a relative there. These people are interviewed more than ten years later. Police often get plenty of reports when a murder happens and I was a newspaper reporter. The descriptions of people that come in vary wildly.

Choosing what you want can create a whole different person, indeed.

The key is here: on The Education Forum, they have showed how Lee Oswald had three files. They all belonged to the Lee Oswald I knew...Lee Harvey Oswald.

But one file had a 'card'--when clandestine matters were ongoing about Lee, in this file he was called Lee 'Henry' Oswald. In a second file, another card showed Lee Harvey Oswald was called 'Harvey' Oswald. All three were the same person.

We now believe that Armstrong did not understand or the new testimony was not available when he saw these separate files.

It seems that the same man was referred to this way to show what operations he was being used for.

In addition, many false reports were created to give Lee deep cover all the way back to childhood. He told me such steps were taken so that when he returned from the Soviet Union, he would be able to take up a 'normal life' due to the deep cover fables created about him.

These have now been tuned into different people, but the new files show that the distinct possibility exists that Armstrong may have interpreted these files as not belonging to the same man, but to two individuals who were distinct.

The fact is, that was the intention, so Lee could hide his past after his return from the Soviet Union, and indeed could enter any new project and return to a dual identity--covered in the states or elsewhere, while actually on assignment, say, back in Russia or in Cuba, etc.

Lee attempted to extricate himself from this by asking for a permanent transfer to Mexico. This is why he and Marina wept when they parted in New Orleans and she went to Irving and he went to Mexico City.

Originally, he was supposed to be allowed to stay there.

But I had angered Ochsner and Ochsner wanted us separated.

Lee was ordered to return to Dallas.

He did not object very much because he wanted to see his new baby.

They got him back to Dallas, of course to use him as a patsy.

They promised him that he could be assigned permanently in Mexico City and the Yucatan, etc. At Christmas.

By then, of course, they would have him accused as JFK's assassin and be rid of him.

As early as July, Lee realized that he was 'better off dead to both sides' as he out it (US and USSR).

Now you will keep finding these files, but they were covers laid in, and some of these testimonies, besides, are based on memories of people who may or may not have ever met the real Lee Oswald. They are decades-old memories and we are talking about a quiet boy not easy to remember, when these people saw hundreds of boys go through their system constantly.

Edited March 19, 2010 by James H. Fetzer