Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

Judyth debunked that rubbish claim long ago, Jack. Try reading post #945.

Jack,

If you were a woman, who begins life with a first name, middle name,

and family name, but which changes when they marry, I doubt that you

would find this so mysterious. Why don't you ask your wife about it?

Thanks.

Jim

In searching for information about JVB, I came across a JFK website that

lists these ALIASES.

Jack

Jim...you missed the point entirely. JVB has claimed that she "hated" her family name

of AVARY (Judy Ann Avary), so she changed her name to Judyth A. VARY. I consider

this a peculiar thing for a teen girl to do. And then go off all alone to a distant strange

city. Sounds like a bad familial relationship. A runaway?

Jack

Edited April 11, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Mike Williams]

Man for a blind lady she types A LOT and OFTEN and QUICKLY!

She sounds A LOT like Fetzer.

Bill O'Reily called Fetzer a nut, could this be a case of dual personalities?

Sybil Fetzer mayhap?

Sorry guys, I just could not help myself.

[Barb Junkkarinen]

JIM AND JUDYTH RESPOND TO GREENLEE, SHACKELFORD, AND WHITE

NOTE: I suppose that Greenlee, who has been posting nasties to Junkkarinen on

another site, belongs here to add to the fray. How many have now piled on about my

inquiry about some code that was linked to Junkkarinen's site but turned out to be

about her son rather than her? Junkkarinen, Thompson, Farley, Viklund, Greenlee,

and no doubt others. That's a lot of posts for asking about some apparently military

code in the belief that they had come from Barb's page to which his page was linked:

"I'm very sorry for the indefensible crap Fetzer posted about your son", he says. But

the only "indefensible crap" posted is his. The code I posted was some that Barb's son

had included on his own Facebook page. Facebook is public and he had it posted there.

My only mistake was to suppose it came from Barb, when it came from another page

linked to Barb's page. It was nothing more than a simple inquiry in one of my posts:

Stop this BS, Fetzer. NOTHING regarding my son "belongs here." After the pounding you took, one would think you would have gotten the message. What is WRONG with you?

Kevin Greenlee, has not been writing "nasties" to me.

There is not now no never was a link on MY facebook page that goes to the information about my son that you posted.

Someone went to my son's facebook page ... and somehow got to his PRIVATE (friends only) info page.

YOU stupidly decided you had some dirt on me that I should have to explain to the people here, you copied and pasted the text in your post that the moderators then removed. Not taking the hint <wink, wink> you then posted a SHAM apology and included a direct link to what you said was MY facebook page. Had you even bothered to try that link yourself, you would have seen it went directly to my son's facebook page.

Then, to top it off, after you saw that a moderator had edited that link OUT of your post, and the moderator's name automatically showed up at the bottom indicating who had edited it, YOU go in and edit out THEIR name and make it look like you edited the post yourself!

Some lurker writes me a nice note on the mod group over what you had done, so you think it is now relevant here.

Get over yourself, Fetzer.

And leave my son out of your posts. Got it? You are so desperate that you are slithering around my facebook page looking for something to throw, but my son is no part of this discussion, or this arena. Keep your slimy paws off of him and anyone else's child. Creepy.

This was over and done with and we'd all moved on. Let's do that again ... permanently. Go figure Fetzer wanting to showcase what creepy things he does, what poor judgment he has, and that he posted things, that if one chooses to believe him, he never bothered to even check out before dashing to his keyboard ... multiple times.

[Mike Williams]

JIM AND JUDYTH RESPOND TO GREENLEE, SHACKELFORD, AND WHITE

NOTE: I suppose that Greenlee, who has been posting nasties to Junkkarinen on

another site, belongs here to add to the fray. How many have now piled on about my

inquiry about some code that was linked to Junkkarinen's site but turned out to be

about her son rather than her? Junkkarinen, Thompson, Farley, Viklund, Greenlee,

and no doubt others. That's a lot of posts for asking about some apparently military

code in the belief that they had come from Barb's page to which his page was linked:

"I'm very sorry for the indefensible crap Fetzer posted about your son", he says. But

the only "indefensible crap" posted is his. The code I posted was some that Barb's son

had included on his own Facebook page. Facebook is public and he had it posted there.

My only mistake was to suppose it came from Barb, when it came from another page

linked to Barb's page. It was nothing more than a simple inquiry in one of my posts:

Stop this BS, Fetzer. NOTHING regarding my son "belongs here." After the pounding you took, one would think you would have gotten the message. What is WRONG with you?

Kevin Greenlee, has not been writing "nasties" to me.

There is not now no never was a link on MY facebook page that goes to the information about my son that you posted.

Someone went to my son's facebook page ... and somehow got to his PRIVATE (friends only) info page.

YOU stupidly decided you had some dirt on me that I should have to explain to the people here, you copied and pasted the text in your post that the moderators then removed. Not taking the hint <wink, wink> you then posted a SHAM apology and included a direct link to what you said was MY facebook page. Had you even bothered to try that link yourself, you would have seen it went directly to my son's facebook page.

Then, to top it off, after you saw that a moderator had edited that link OUT of your post, and the moderator's name automatically showed up at the bottom indicating who had edited it, YOU go in and edit out THEIR name and make it look like you edited the post yourself!

Some lurker writes me a nice note on the mod group over what you had done, so you think it is now relevant here.

Get over yourself, Fetzer.

And leave my son out of your posts. Got it? You are so desperate that you are slithering around my facebook page looking for something to throw, but my son is no part of this discussion, or this arena. Keep your slimy paws off of him and anyone else's child. Creepy.

This was over and done with and we'd all moved on. Let's do that again ... permanently. Go figure Fetzer wanting to showcase what creepy things he does, what poor judgment he has, and that he posted things, that if one chooses to believe him, he never bothered to even check out before dashing to his keyboard ... multiple times.

Fetzer takes another credibility flush.....and rightfully so.

[Dean Hagerman]

JUDYTH COMMENTS ABOUT SOME OF WHAT HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED HERE SO FAR

We are making progress. We have unmasked so many of the false rumors and statements that

had been traveling under the wire about me that were false, including each of the following:

1) John Simkin showing prejudice against me at once by implying I lied--corrected by Dr. Fetzer;

2) Jack White saying I'd been kicked off DellaRosa's forum for abusive posting--uncovered as untrue;

3) David Lifton's claims about the illegal taping he did have been uncovered as misrerpresenations,

where he has shown amazing and enduring prejudice by attempting to ignore those findings;

4) Barb's 'fact finding" has been proven (for those whose minds aren't closed) to be incompetent;

5) silly claims about me, such as that I changed my name from "Avary" to "Vary" because I hated my

family name, have been exposed;

6) the "Kankun" matter has been settled except for the McAdams' folks, who will never change;

7) the Walter Reed address code factor has been placed back where it belongs in the trivia box;

8) we have shown the truth about Oswald's Tooth, despite the websites that twisted everything I'd said;

9) we have shown that support for "Harvey" and "Lee" attending the same junior high is questionable;

9) we have established that HARVEY and LEE theories ignore some obvioius phoito distortions, where it

seems that Armstrong has been given, or made, bad copies that distorted Oswald: we have more to do;

10) we have established that the entire Murret family would have had to know "both" Harvey and Lee

due to the tooth matter, where Lillian purportedly paid for "Lee"s dental work, as Dr. Fetzer pointed out;

[Barb Junkkarinen]

Judyth

I respect Harry Livingstone alot, in fact High Treason is in my top 5 books on the assassination and one of the first I ever read

I really would love to read your reply to these posts from Barb and Kevin (quoting Martin)

I think this is a perfect chance to watch Judyth go crazy trying to defend these absurd actions she took with Harry

Good thought, Dean. I'd like to see him reply with his own thoughts in a reasoned exchange on any of the issues and information that has been put forth, much of it documented. Pipe dream, me thinks.

Bests,

Barb :-)

[Barb Junkkarinen]

Over the last few weeks only Barb Junkkarinen has had the patience to virtually single-handedly take apart the evermore complex posturing of JudythFetzer. Unable to reply with sensible arguments, Fetzer (true to form) starts trolling the Internet. Intent on finding something with which to slime Barb, Fetzer starts looking into Barb's employment. He comes up with the totally wrong fact that Barb worked for ROTC in Arizona while she lived in Oregon. Only much later does our hero tumble to the fact that Barb's son.... not Barb... was in ROTC. And then the final idiocy.. HE BLAMES BARB FOR HIS GUTTERBALL MISTAKE!

You just can't play fair... can you, Professor?!

Josiah Thompson

The whole thread is turning into a soap opera. Sad.

I've been reading posts on the Judyth topic for years as co-moderator of alt.assassination.jfk.

This thread is just another "episode" in the ongoing saga. I suppose it is a more interesting topic if one is a participant (and a sharpshooter with the facts such as Barb) and actively doing some legwork to ferret out the facts. As a longtime lurker -- but an attentive one through the posting bouts involving Shackleford, Barb J, Pamela and a host of others -- I have yet to be the least impressed by Judyth's tale. At least The Young and The Restless moves forward in its plot development and thus tries to prolong the viewer's devotion to the characters. This soap opera, on the other hand, is replete with slightly altered replays and subject to re-colorization.

The Guiding Light is over.

The last episode of As The World Turns will air in September 2010.

I see no hope for a final episode in the Judyth opera even if all ladies of whatever dimension in time or space gather in some infinite field of dreams and SING for hours!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIVfbylUU-M

60 minutes? No go. Time eternal? I am beginning to wonder!

Cheers

Peter Fokes,

Toronto

Hi Peter!

No soap opera writer could hold a candle to this.<g> Though the 60 Minutes/CBS psychiatrist they called in that concluded she was a "story-teller" might beg to differ.

Bests,

Barb :-)

[Barb Junkkarinen]

Barb,

You get a small gold star for doing all this work.

Same goes for Anthony Marsh, for actually digging up this obscure letter at the JFK Library.

When are people going to catch on and stop wasting time on this lady?

Life is finite.

Should even a minute be wasted on this lady, and her fictions?

DSL

Hi David,

It's too late to save us, we've already wasted too much time, but leaving as many documented facts as possible for new people who come along can perhaps help keep them from getting bogged down in the same morass for so long, eh?

Bests,

Barb :-)

[Jack White]

Has anyone corresponded with Robert Baker lately? From what I have seen on the internet,

he does not believe his ex's tales. Also noted that JVB presented a lot of "love letters"

written to Robert as being to LHO (salutations torn off).

Jack

Note to Jim: I spend less than 30 minutes a day on this forum, and less than half that on

this interminable JVB thread. I never read anything NOT ON THE FIRST PAGE, so I have

probably missed more than half the messages. To answer a question, I have NEVER heard

REAL DEAL radio show, or any other; I have more important things to do. Yes, I read the

Haslam book when it came out, when I was still buying JFK books. I doubted much of it

and still do, though it has some interesting information. Right now I am at halftime of a

basketball game...far more entertaining than reading about JVB.

Edited April 11, 2010 by Jack White

[Glenn Viklund]

Fetzer:

"I addressed this issue in #1018 and in #1047. I am not the only one who finds it odd

that there is very little about Barb to be found on Barb's Facebook page. We already knew

that Vikelund, Junkkarenin, and McAdams were working together. Now Greenlee joins them

This is a nice example of the critics methodology: find something to attack, no matter how

innocuous, and beat it to death! No one will even protest this genuinely indefensible crap!"

In your mind, Mr Fetzer.

I've come to realize by now that you're not much better than Judyth; the same paranoia and the same utter lack of judgment. You are simply unable to understand that so many people, independently of each other, have come to the same, unavoidable conclusion: JVB is a scam artist. Nothing less, nothing more.

This thread underlines this, probably better than most other chat-threads over the years.

These conspiracies of anti-JVB co-operation only exist in your head, Mr Fetzer.

Edited April 11, 2010 by Glenn Viklund

[Jack White]

Suggestion to Jim: book Robert Baker on THE REAL DEAL. I promise I will listen.

Jack

[John Simkin]

1) John Simkin showing prejudice against me at once by implying I lied--corrected by Dr. Fetzer;

I assume this refers to your claim that I started the JFK Forum because JVB suggested it. I have already said this is untrue. Surely, I am the best person to know why I created this Forum.

I did take part in a long email exchange with JVB where she answered my questions. Eventually, I came to the conclusion that she was a fantasist.

[David Lifton]

Jim Fetzer is continuing his campaign of reaching into the gutter to stir the pot and attempting to sully my name, using

Judyth Baker as his chosen vehicle for disseminating false information about me.

He obviously does not like the fact that, based on my interactions with Judyth, I believe her to be a pathological xxxx,

a fraud, and a fantasist. But there are other dimensions to all this. Some months back, I made clear to Fetzer that I do not subscribe

to his ideas as a 9/11 Truther--specifically, I do not believe that the US Government was complicit in the destruction of the World Trade Center;

nor do I believe that a missile, and not a plane, hit the Pentagon.

I know that Doug Horne feels the same way--we see completely eye to eye on this subject--and Doug

has spelled this out very clearly in an Epilogue to his five volume work "Inside the ARRB." But Fetzer is like a bull in a china shop.

He seems not to care whom he offends, or how he goes about it.

He seems to think he is in charge, and is free to sling mud at anyone, anytime. Well, I have had enough of

him and his antics.

In the last 24 hours, and in response to my posting a brief statement complimenting Barb Junkkarinen (and

Tony Marsh) on finding a letter (at the JFK Library) that Judyth wrote to President Kennedy--and in general, supporting their

interpretation that this was nothing more than a fan letter, and that Ralph Dungan's response was completely

routine (and should not be invested with the overwrought interpretation(s) that Judyth has placed on it),

Fetzer sent me a very threatening email which reads, in part, as follows:

QUOTE:

I would not be investing so much time and effort on this woman had I not

become convinced that she is "the real deal". So if you don't want to

spend more time on her, THEN DON'T! But keep your nose out of where it

does not belong, if you don't mind. I have to deal with enough little

twits on the thread to have someone I largely admire come on to add more

logs to the fire. If you haven't been reading the thread, which I take

to be obvious, THEN STAY THE xxxx OFF IT!

UNQUOTE

In the immediate aftermath of this threat, Judyth then repeated her lies about me (and again,

this is all via postings made by Fetzer) to the effect that Rachel Oswald was not paid any money

when a snippet of a 1991 filmed interview I did with Rachel was used by the show HARDCOPY, a year later,

when in fact Rachel was paid a total of $ 4,000, and there are canceled checks to prove these transactions.

As I also stated previously, Rachel was furious--and rightfully so (as was I, by the way)--with the poor taste

shown by a particular HARDCOPY producer in his tasteless editing of the show.

Fetzer is now seeking to recycle that whole sorry episode. He is apparently using Judyth to carry on a smear campaign

against me, attempting to recycle what happened 18 years ago, in the year 2010.

As Joe McCarthy was asked,during the hearings: Have you no decency, sir? To which I would add:

Are there no limits to you stinking behavior?

With each passing day, I want less and less to do with Fetzer, his screwball beliefs,

and his highly unethical and out of control tactics.

Do I believe there was a major conspiracy in the JFK case? Yes, of course I do. Does Fetzer subscribe to that, too?

Yes, he apparently does. But so what. At some point, I simply do not care what someone believes about the Warren Report,

but have to focus on their behavior as a human being, and I not only have had enough of Judyth and her behavior, but

Fetzer as well.

DSL

4/11/10; 3:50 AM PDT

Los Angeles, CA

Edited April 11, 2010 by David Lifton

[Jack White]

This is very regrettable.

That frauds like Files, Holt and Baker can splinter JFK researchers is likely part of

a deliberate misinformation campaign...carefully managed by the propaganda

masters. It is conceived to linger on and on, endlessly. Ten years now and her

"book is still not published."

I suggest that a route to finding the truth about JVB is to interview the man who

was married to her, who tells an entirely different story about what happened in

1963.

Jim has chosen to endanger all of his previous fine research and friendships

in order to embrace this one strange woman. Like some others before him, he

has dug himself a very deep hole that it will be hard to climb out of, when the

truth emerges...if ever.

Sadly,

Jack

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

JIM AND JUDYTH RESPOND TO JACK WHITE

NOTE: Just for the record, Jack White has long been and will remain one of my favorite

personalities in JFK research. Until our divergence over Judyth, he and I have been on

the same side of virtually every battle fought about what happened to JFK. I am sorry

it has come to this, but my commitment to truth overrides loyalty to my friends when I

am convinced that they have lost their way. I respect Jack's right to his opinion about

Judyth and all other issues JFK. What I do not respect is his closed-mindedness and his

obvious unwillingness to consider the evidence. He has not read the books, listened to

the interviews, or even read the posts that Judyth and I have been making. And I find

it quite bizarre that he would think my ongoing pursuit of truth involving Judyth should

undermine (what he takes to be) my accomplishments in the past. Life is too complex

for such simplistic thinking to be reflective of the realities of the situation. Each of us

is free to agree with some of another student's research and reject other parts of it, as

I shall illustrate in relation to the work of another old friend, whose relationship has now

ruptured, David Lifton. For now, however, let me conclude by offering Judyth's replies.

JUDYTH ANSWERS JACK'S QUESTIONS:

Dear Jack:

You have asked some good questions about the book Livingstone published. I wrote the book. It was edited

by Livingstone, who can be difficult to work with.

The orginal 'real' book (written for an honest publisher) -- Deadly Alliance -- had been co-authored by

Dr. Howard Platzman using many emails I wrote to him. We wnet back and forth, but there were errors and

too much was missing. It's not easy to write book by emails! I was living in Holland, and while going over

that book, it was stolen, along with my computer and almost everything I owned. The thieves later would

have an encounter with Wim Dankbaar, who actually shoved his fist through a window on their door so we

could open it and get some of my things from them. Dankbaar, despite his cut and bleeding fist, was not

afraid of them, unlike the neighbors who watched, like cowed dogs.

Harrison Livingstone, having seen portions my rewritten version, which was underway since Deadly Alliance

had been stolen, heard how the thieves were blackmailing me, threatening to publish the stolen book -- with

revisions as they pleased -- on the Internet, unless I handed over my screenplay to them. They said they had

some connections, through the Mafia, with Hollywood. And no, I am not making this up.

Livingstone quickly pulled together some people to pay for the book to be published under his own logo. He

had done investigating of my story, since he and Shackelford were friends, and he had already mentioned my

testimony in one of his recent books. Odd that on McAdams' newsgroup, John Leyden wrote that I self-published

the book Livingstone published -- saying that I got it printed at Kinko's! Leyden and his friends post such outright

misinfo about me from time to time, and lurkers might believe it. They don't care.

I am going into this detail, Jack, because I respect you and want you to have a full account.

The book was imporant. Livingstone did not want the stolen version to be quoted by anyone, though to this day,

McAdams & Co. do quote from the stolen Deadly Allaince. Shame on them!

Regarding Eaglesham:

I believed Eaglesham was doing a very good job until I became friends with Dangerous Dan Marvin. I had been

sent a photo of the Pitzer murder which has never been published. I had no idea what it was about, though.

This was in 2000.

I get sent the most amazing things. This photo was stolen along with my computer and my book by the Dutch

thieves, in 2004, but I told Allan Eaglesham about the photo, which was different from what he showed me.

Though Dan Marvin is elderly, and might have had a few details wrong, there is no doubt whatsoever that evidence

concerning Pitzer's autopsy has been misinterpreted. There is more reason to believe that he might have been

murdered than can be ascertained from Eaglesham's writings, although I respect Eaglesham's research abilities

and need to see more.

I have some small issues with his assessment of the photos, and because of my medical experience, I came to the

conclusion that the possibility of foul play existed, largely due to blood patterns and a misinterpretation of autopsy

details, which I believe need reexamination.

Having known Dan a long time, and seeing that he was exonerated when Trine Day and Dan were sued by former

Green Berets who acually lied on the stand -- a final review of tape recordings they made years earlier proved they

were lying -- set in my mind prety strongly that Dan Marvin told the truth. As a committed Christian, I believe he is

incapable of perpetrating a falsehood. Anyuone who knows Dan well must ake what he says seriously, even if time

may have dimmed some details in his memory.

I consider Eaglesham a good researcher, but I also see some misinerpreed aspects regarding the Pitzer autopsy

that jive with the photo I was sent. If I had known what I know now, I would have sent that photo far and wide.

But I didn't. I had phone calls from Sirhan Sirhan's lawyer, Mr. Teeter, just before he died under what I consider

suspicious circumstances.

I have no friendship or animosity regarding Allan Eaglesham.

I think he's a good researcher. His work on the Jimmy Files casing is excellent. I found a problem with the form

used to 'prove' when the casing was manufactured, though. It needs closer iexamination for several reasons. Other

such forms do not clesely resemble it in several key areas. I think it was supposedly found in the trash, and some

other odd logistics problems from Remington suggests some tampering going on that I find of concern. All in all,

until re-examined, including a good look at the paper with a high resolution scan -- which wasn't done, I believe --

until we have more information, Eaglesham's findings seem correct and apropos.

I believe Files heard enough about the assassination that he has important information. He has indisputable mafia

ties with some of the very bad boys. Furthermore, I saw some untrue 'facts' posted about Files from a military man,

claiming a certain task force, whatever, did not exist, when in fact I knew it did because of my own family's military

history. That gave me pause.. The facts offered by the military guy were patently false.

I have argued with Wim Dankbaar about Files, with vigor.

One fact that Wim told me, is that no description of the bullet casing having been indented had ever been in the

newspapers or anywhere else when Files was asked about it. That man described a bullet casing accurately,

according to what I have been told.

But we have the problem of the 'hyphen' on the evidence....Fikles currently and for the rest of his life, it seems,

languishes inside Joliet prison, a nototorious place where he had no access to such newspaper articles anyway.

They do not even allow him to be brought fresh fruit, and he has cancer which is going untreated, last I heard.

I do consider Allan Eaglesham a good investigator and wish him well.

Because I have defended Dan Marvin, when his integrity was being atacked, Allan may not wish the same good

wishes on me, but I found him a quite intelligent man.

Having said that, I do not know why he is so interested in Dan Marvin and Jimmy Files. How did he get involved

in the Pitzer case? The Jimmy Files matter? I have tried to figure out why he has expended so much energy on

them: others here may know that answer. He has some good scientific training behind him...it's obvious. Maybe

others can tell me more about him?

JVB

This is very regrettable.

That frauds like Files, Holt and Baker can splinter JFK researchers is likely part of

a deliberate misinformation campaign...carefully managed by the propaganda

masters. It is conceived to linger on and on, endlessly. Ten years now and her

"book is still not published."

I suggest that a route to finding the truth about JVB is to interview the man who

was married to her, who tells an entirely different story about what happened in

1963.

Jim has chosen to endanger all of his previous fine research and friendships

in order to embrace this one strange woman. Like some others before him, he

has dug himself a very deep hole that it will be hard to climb out of, when the

truth emerges...if ever.

Sadly,

Jack

Edited April 12, 2010 by James H. Fetzer