Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

[Poster's note: It may be rewarding to read the comments appended at the end of the article. To do so, click on the link below.]

Oswald spied on group to save JFK, alleged lover says

By sonia verma

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

Published Monday, Oct. 17, 2011 9:54PM EDT

Last updated Monday, Oct. 17, 2011 11:29PM EDT


This interview has been edited and condensed.


There are two themes at work in Judyth's statements -- one is the love affair, the other the bioweapon.

I would not call it a bioweapon. It is to big a word for a biological device to put someone to dead. It is a kind of poison, like botulinus toxin, or digitalis: the only difference is, that back in the 60ties it was not known that deadly cancer could be put in someone in an artificial way.

Maybe the cancer bioweapon project was a kind of deception operation to discredit the kid JVB and youngster Oswald to make them more dirigible.

BTW: JVB and Oswald started to work at the same day THREE TIMES. At Standart Coffee, at Reilys AND on October the 16th 1963. Ossi at the SBDB, JVB at Pen Chem.


Edited by Karl Kinaski
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 320
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

My opinion is that LHO is probably inserted in the picnic photo. Its provenance is unknown.




FRONTLINE obtained this photograph from John B. Ciravolo, Jr., of New Orleans. Ciravolo was also a C.A.P. member in 1955 and says he was in the same unit with Oswald and was standing right in front of him in the photo. Ciravolo identified David Ferrie, while former C.A.P. cadet Tony Atzenhoffer, also of New Orleans, identified Oswald and Ferrie in the photograph, and Colin Hammer, who says he served with both men in the C.A.P., also identified both in the photograph.

FRONTLINE located the photographer, Chuck Frances, who says he took the picture for the C.A.P. Francis also said that when he was interviewed by the FBI, he told them Oswald and Ferrie knew each other, but he did not tell them about the photograph. The executor of Ferrie's estate, as well as Ferrie's godson, also picked out Ferrie.

After the Kennedy assassination, David Ferrie told investigators he never knew Lee Oswald. "I never heard David Ferrie mention Lee Harvey Oswald," said Layton Martens, a former C.A.P. Cadet and a close friend to Ferrie until Ferrie's death in 1967.

But when FRONTLINE showed Martens the photograph, he identified Ferrie. "It does indicate the possibity of an associaton," said Martens, "but if and to what extent is another question. Of course we've all been photographed with people, and we could be presented with photographs later and asked, 'Well, do you know this person? Obviously, you must because you've been photographed with them.' Well no, it's just a photograph, and I don't know that person. It's just someone who happened to be in the picture."

"As dramatic as the discovery of this photograph is after thirty years," says Michael Sullivan, FRONTLINE executive producer for special projects, "one should be cautious in ascribing its meaning. The photograph does give much support to the eyewitnesses who say they saw Ferrie and Oswald together in the C.A.P., and it makes Ferrie's denials that he ever knew Oswald less credible. But it does not prove that the two men were with each other in 1963, nor that they were involved in a conspiracy to kill the president."

There are TWO different versions of this photo print. The provenance of both prints is unknown. I looked and cannot find

my two copies nor my studies regarding them. The studies likely were three computers ago or lost in a computer crash.

I strongly believe that LHO was added to the photo. For example, just look at the gray scale. LHO is the only person

with a WHITE t-shirt. His whole gray scale differs from the rest of the photo. Was he the only one with BLACK hair and

a BLACK belt, when no other blacks are in the picture?



Good to see you back. Disagreements aside, I hope you have recovered well from your problems.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You do have my empathy for what's going on with you and Baker, despite my not knowing the details. Baker can be touchy and insist on complete loyalty, and lash out when she doesn't get it. I think I now understand why she does this.

Thank you for your kind words.

I agree with your assessment of the treatment of anyone who in Judyth's eyes is less than a devoted sycophant. A few times since January I have wondered how those who survived Jonestown felt, then just put that thought down to raw nerves.

One last quick observation on Baker's behavior, something I have felt for some time now: I have never encountered a witness who behaves as Baker behaves.

To quote Dr. Henry Lee: "Something wrong."

There is nothing about Judyth that seems to be comparable with other witnesses. For one thing, she wears a lot of hats. A witness usually has a statement about what they have personally seen and heard and that is that. Judyth has things she says were told to her, other things she has apparently researched and brought forth on her own, so her environment seems very complicated.

Also, Judyth is using a genre that creates more problems than it solves; that of a dramatic narrative. What would be normal tweaking and editing of any other such project becomes, when it involves a witness statement, tainted with the possibility of sanitizing and correcting.

Then, of course, the research community was not really given a chance to set up the hoops that anyone claiming to be the Holy Grail of the assassination would have to go through to gain those credentials. Instead, it was pretty much hit over the head with the promise of a 60 Minutes episode; a fait accompli, as it were. Of course, that didn't happen, but the effect of having her statements vetted at that level undermined what the community itself ought to have been able to accomplish.

My, My.

Please Pam,

Give us one good reason as to why anyone should believe there is anything sincere about what you say here? Just one?

Link to post
Share on other sites


Good to see you back. Disagreements aside, I hope you have recovered well from your problems.

The post you are replying to is from May. Jack is still unwell.

Sorry, I haven't been around for a while and got a bit taken by seeing a posting from Jack. I apologize to anyone who might have been offended, not my intention.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now
  • Create New...