Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

Barb,

"It was brought up there that just because you have confidence in your memory, that doesn't mean it's accurate -- a point well taken. However, I did write down enough to keep my memories accurate, and the conversations, moreover, were very important, since they had to do with my cancer research career, planning to kill Castro, life with Lee (whom I dearly loved, who died before my eyes on TV), and knowing Lee Oswald was blamed for Kennedy's death. The murder of a President makes you pay attention....."

This is a pretty good example of what I suggested earlier in this thread. There's always the option of changing the story. Now that she's apparently understood that it's impossible to remember conversations that took place several decades ago,

******* SHE HAS NOTES! *********

(Add details, remove details or change details..cut the tail and new heads will grow, cut the head and there will be new tails...)

And so the never ending and ever changing organism called 'the Baker story' keeps living it's life all of it's own.

-------

Well, much can be said about Judyth Baker. But I'll give her this - she's displaying an absolutely outstanding creativity.

:D

She admits to having taken a course in CREATIVE WRITING. Now that is believable!

Jack

Jack,

Darn, I will have to agree that you've found something believable!

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 320
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Barb,

"It was brought up there that just because you have confidence in your memory, that doesn't mean it's accurate -- a point well taken. However, I did write down enough to keep my memories accurate, and the conversations, moreover, were very important, since they had to do with my cancer research career, planning to kill Castro, life with Lee (whom I dearly loved, who died before my eyes on TV), and knowing Lee Oswald was blamed for Kennedy's death. The murder of a President makes you pay attention....."

This is a pretty good example of what I suggested earlier in this thread. There's always the option of changing the story. Now that she's apparently understood that it's impossible to remember conversations that took place several decades ago,

******* SHE HAS NOTES! *********

(Add details, remove details or change details..cut the tail and new heads will grow, cut the head and there will be new tails...)

And so the never ending and ever changing organism called 'the Baker story' keeps living it's life all of it's own.

-------

Well, much can be said about Judyth Baker. But I'll give her this - she's displaying an absolutely outstanding creativity.

:D

She admits to having taken a course in CREATIVE WRITING. Now that is believable!

Jack

She was at the University Louisiana Lafayette going for her doctoral .... but switched, at some point, to English. She completed her orals but nor her dissertation. So, she is ABD.

Bests,

Barb :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this yesterday on another forum:

Originally Posted by Brian Anderson

Hi Jack

How did JVB escape John Armstrong's research dragnet? Or does JVB fall into the category where Armstrong could not get enough backup to include her story in his book? Any thoughts?

Brian

That is easy. Absolutely NO DOCUMENTATION exists that

the FBI, Secret Service, CIA, Naval Intelligence, Garrison,

Warren Commission, House Committee, Church Committee

or hundreds of JFK Researchers ever noticed ANY of the

events described by JVB, even though all of these named

groups either were controlling, watching, studying or otherwise

at all times figuring LHO's every move in New Orleans.

Now you tell me how JVB managed to be so invisible to all of

the above that NO DOCUMENTATION EXISTS!

John relied on DOCUMENTATION or personal interviews and

research for his book. Not a single document refers to Baker.

Now you tell me whether she belongs in H&L.

Jack

The next questions, then, ought to be the extent to which an Oswald-Ochsner connection and a Ferrie-Ochsner connection can be verified through research - through investigation of INCA, Ochsner's involvement in Oswald's New Orleans radio interview, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI: I find most of Raymond Carrol's comments "right on."

But If you want a good example of a "dead end," your writings presenting the notion that Oswald was NOT on the McWatter's bus and also NOT in Whaley's cab are a fine example of something that is entirely false and (in addition) can be validly described as a real dead end.

Not only is your hypothesis unsupportable, it presents an easy target for the likes of DVP (with whom I disagree on in numerous critical areas), but who--in this particular instance-- happens to have you dead to rights, in his criticism of your "analysis" of the bus-ride/cab ride business.

And, fyi, it does not surprise me that Mr. DiEugenio applauds you for your completely unfounded and weak hypothesis, in that area.

If that's the sort of thing that is going into your TV script about "the life and times of Oswald," I'm sure the audience will be on the edge of their seats, as they watch the plotters masterminding your completely illogical and ill-founded version of this bus-taxicab "conspiracy theory."

DSL

Link to post
Share on other sites

Barb,

"It was brought up there that just because you have confidence in your memory, that doesn't mean it's accurate -- a point well taken. However, I did write down enough to keep my memories accurate, and the conversations, moreover, were very important, since they had to do with my cancer research career, planning to kill Castro, life with Lee (whom I dearly loved, who died before my eyes on TV), and knowing Lee Oswald was blamed for Kennedy's death. The murder of a President makes you pay attention....."

This is a pretty good example of what I suggested earlier in this thread. There's always the option of changing the story. Now that she's apparently understood that it's impossible to remember conversations that took place several decades ago,

******* SHE HAS NOTES! *********

(Add details, remove details or change details..cut the tail and new heads will grow, cut the head and there will be new tails...)

And so the never ending and ever changing organism called 'the Baker story' keeps living it's life all of it's own.

-------

Well, much can be said about Judyth Baker. But I'll give her this - she's displaying an absolutely outstanding creativity.

:D

She admits to having taken a course in CREATIVE WRITING. Now that is believable!

Jack

That is one of the more difficult aspects of her situation, imo. How can one expect to have credibility in a research community if one is focused on another sort of presentation? It at the least sends out mixed signals. When it comes to something as important as being a virtual holy grail of the assassination, that has been an even larger concern.

In addition, when one is involved in a creative writing situation, (as I have been on a different project, for example, taking writing classes at the Loft in Minneapolis), you learn to become immersed in the scene that you are writing. You engage all your senses. It is as if you were there. This is what I would call a dramatic device.

Edited by Pamela Brown
Link to post
Share on other sites

Barb,

"It was brought up there that just because you have confidence in your memory, that doesn't mean it's accurate -- a point well taken. However, I did write down enough to keep my memories accurate, and the conversations, moreover, were very important, since they had to do with my cancer research career, planning to kill Castro, life with Lee (whom I dearly loved, who died before my eyes on TV), and knowing Lee Oswald was blamed for Kennedy's death. The murder of a President makes you pay attention....."

This is a pretty good example of what I suggested earlier in this thread. There's always the option of changing the story. Now that she's apparently understood that it's impossible to remember conversations that took place several decades ago,

******* SHE HAS NOTES! *********

(Add details, remove details or change details..cut the tail and new heads will grow, cut the head and there will be new tails...)

And so the never ending and ever changing organism called 'the Baker story' keeps living it's life all of it's own.

-------

Well, much can be said about Judyth Baker. But I'll give her this - she's displaying an absolutely outstanding creativity.

:D

She admits to having taken a course in CREATIVE WRITING. Now that is believable!

Jack

That is one of the more difficult aspects of her situation, imo. How can one expect to have credibility in a research community if one is focused on another sort of presentation? It at the least sends out mixed signals. When it comes to something as important as being a virtual holy grail of the assassination, that has been an even larger concern.

In addition, when one is involved in a creative writing situation, (as I have been on a different project, for example, taking writing classes at the Loft in Minneapolis), you learn to become immersed in the scene that you are writing. You engage all your senses. It is as if you were there. This is what I would call a dramatic device.

JVB is mimicking the WR...another piece of "creative writing".

Jack

Link to post
Share on other sites

P.S. You have the same evidence for the bus ride as the Warren Commission had, and the same evidence that DVP uses in his "arguments." A pristine bus ticket and the ravings of Mary Bledsoe. You can keep 'em. If Oswald was on a bus - it certainly wasn't McWatter's. End of story.

The evidence is the same for everyone.

THe Warren Commission would have loved to ignore the McWatters bus ride so they could get Oz to his rooming house before 1 o'clock, but the evidence that Oz was on the bus is incontrovertible.

If Mr. Farley wasn't blinded by his own preconceptions, and his own over-inflated ego, he might learn something from this thread:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=12509

Edited by J. Raymond Carroll
Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta shoe-horn the evidence into a tight fitting story, eh Ray? By hook or by crook.

Maybe Mr. Farley did read that thread twice, but if so it all went over his head.

Mr. Farley wouldn't know what EVIDENCE is if it bit him in the ass.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A bus transfer that could have easily been acquired AFTER the assassination and the testimony of one witness is certainly NOT "incontrovertible" evidence. What other evidence do you have?

As I demonstrated on the thread which you read twice, but did not understand, the bus transfer is not necessary to prove that Oz was on McWatters bus.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep on truckin'.

Is all this noise supposed to prove that Oz was part of a conspiracy?

Lee Oswald claimed he knew nothing about the assassination, and the evidence shows that he was framed. He did not deny taking a bus and a taxi, which are perfectly innocent activities. You seem to be out -Warrening the Warren Commission in an attempt to make his behavior seem sinister.

Keep on truckin.'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Barb,

"It was brought up there that just because you have confidence in your memory, that doesn't mean it's accurate -- a point well taken. However, I did write down enough to keep my memories accurate, and the conversations, moreover, were very important, since they had to do with my cancer research career, planning to kill Castro, life with Lee (whom I dearly loved, who died before my eyes on TV), and knowing Lee Oswald was blamed for Kennedy's death. The murder of a President makes you pay attention....."

This is a pretty good example of what I suggested earlier in this thread. There's always the option of changing the story. Now that she's apparently understood that it's impossible to remember conversations that took place several decades ago,

******* SHE HAS NOTES! *********

(Add details, remove details or change details..cut the tail and new heads will grow, cut the head and there will be new tails...)

And so the never ending and ever changing organism called 'the Baker story' keeps living it's life all of it's own.

-------

Well, much can be said about Judyth Baker. But I'll give her this - she's displaying an absolutely outstanding creativity.

:D

She admits to having taken a course in CREATIVE WRITING. Now that is believable!

Jack

That is one of the more difficult aspects of her situation, imo. How can one expect to have credibility in a research community if one is focused on another sort of presentation? It at the least sends out mixed signals. When it comes to something as important as being a virtual holy grail of the assassination, that has been an even larger concern.

In addition, when one is involved in a creative writing situation, (as I have been on a different project, for example, taking writing classes at the Loft in Minneapolis), you learn to become immersed in the scene that you are writing. You engage all your senses. It is as if you were there. This is what I would call a dramatic device.

JVB is mimicking the WR...another piece of "creative writing".

Jack

Yes, that is indeed the biggest bunch of baloney, and written by lawyers, no less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep on truckin'.

Is all this noise supposed to prove that Oz was part of a conspiracy?

Lee Oswald claimed he knew nothing about the assassination, and the evidence shows that he was framed. He did not deny taking a bus and a taxi, which are perfectly innocent activities. You seem to be out -Warrening the Warren Commission in an attempt to make his behavior seem sinister.

Keep on truckin.'

No, Ray. That's just your weird mind warping what I wrote.

I don't know what goes on in your head sometimes. Leaving by bus would have been completely innocent if he hadn't have been "caught" in the Theater with Tippit's alleged murder weapon on him, along with the bus transfer.

I've been very vocal since joining the forum that I don't believe the Tippit revolver was his and it was forced on him in the Texas Theater, most probably by Gerald Hill IMO. So I don't know why you keep coming out with this "Oswald Accuser" garbage.

Lee,

your summary of the evidence is spot on. Ray can't refute it, so he attacks the messenger. The old axiom about letting the chips fall where they may means nothing to Ray. As for David... I doubt he's even aware of most of the evidence you cited.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...