Pamela Brown Posted January 13, 2015 Share Posted January 13, 2015 Pamela and Paul, Your efforts are appreciated. It is in all our interests to see accurate history overcome feasibly creative writing. I still await the proof of the many claims JVB offers, unless she has a time machine I do not expect they shall be forthcoming. I can assure you that Judyth would fault the makers of the time machine for not giving her the correct responses. Her behavior is shameless, imo...:-0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Caddy Posted January 16, 2015 Author Share Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) http://gizadeathstar.com/2015/01/mdna-intercellular-transfer-demonstrated-new-zealand-really-high-octane-speculation/ Dr. Joseph Farrell asserts a new scientific breakthrough may show support for the claims of Judyth Vary Baker and of Edward Haslam's book, "Dr. Mary's Monkey." Edited January 16, 2015 by Douglas Caddy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 For a little background, check Dr. Ferrell's authors page.....actually I have a couple of his books, highly entertaining if you are into NAZI wonder weapon technology.....note, I said "entertaining"... http://www.amazon.com/Joseph-P.-Farrell/e/B001KCNKF4/ref=ntt_dp_epwbk_0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Caddy Posted January 16, 2015 Author Share Posted January 16, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=YwR7sgn_wMM I read Joseph Farrell's daily postings on Facebook and never miss watching his weekly YouTube analysis of events. I find him highly credible, which I why I posted his commentary on the new scientific discovery and the claims of Judyth Barker and Edward Haslam. My guess is that most nations' intelligence agencies follow his analyses without fail. But judge for yourself by viewing his video for this week found in the link above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=YwR7sgn_wMM I read Joseph Farrell's daily postings on Facebook and never miss watching his weekly YouTube analysis of events. I find him highly credible, which I why I posted his commentary on the new scientific discovery and the claims of Judyth Barker and Edward Haslam. My guess is that most nations' intelligence agencies follow his analyses without fail. But judge for yourself by viewing his video for this week found in the link above. Farrell's work is highly speculative, as is Haslam's. That's what makes them interesting reading. They are writing, in essence, about a false parallel universe of possibilities. Like psuedo-history sci-fi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Oh dear! Judyth Vary Baker Wrongly Tried to Take me to Task! :-0 Says Judyth: "Pamela Brown incorrectly reported that I was asked to leave a booth at Lancer that she implied I somehow invaded. My publisher had purchased a booth there, and I was with him until asked by FRIENDS to join them at their booth. I left quickly in order to speak at my own conference. Pamela Brown created a fake story, but has yet to "find" me." Tsk, tsk, Judyth. What I reported is that I was told that Judyth's publisher did indeed reserve a table in the book selling area of the NID conference in 2013. But they had completed the proper paperwork. Judyth had not, but had walzed in to hawk her book. As a result of the impropriety, she was asked to leave. I will stand by my source that the version told to me by a JFKLancer insider is accurate. This may well be yet one more <yawn> example of Judyth's revisionism. But then, what are we to expect from someone who claims they are smarter than all the rest of us? :-0 I've 'found' her, alright! At the bottom of the sea. With the other bottom-feeders... http://findingjudyth.blogspot.com/2015/01/oh-dear-judyth-vary-baker-wrongly-tried.html PS I have just been contacted by my source at JFKLancer who happens to be the person who asked Judyth to leave. My facts are accurate and I stand by them. Judyth is lying. This is just one example of how Judyth twists evidence to suit her agenda and then tries to discredit the one doing their best to put forth the actual facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Caddy Posted January 16, 2015 Author Share Posted January 16, 2015 http://io9.com/a-mitochondrial-dna-transplant-could-help-treat-hundred-1678014687 I erred in my prior posting in implying that Joseph Farrell was endorsing all claims made by Judyth Vary Baker. If you read his commentary it dealt with the link above. Dr. Farrell's opinion piece was about a scientific discovery that could have a relationship to cancer. I think a strong case can be made that CIA uses cancer as a weapon to eliminate targets, a charge that some national leaders in South America have made. Dr. Farrell's commentary did not mention anything about Judyth's claims of her relationship with Oswald. I have never met Judyth or read her books. My interest lies in promoting freedom of speech and the marketplace of ideas. Judyth has a right to speak and be heard like others in the JFK community, even if what she espouses offends others for a variety of reasons. Judyth's critics have a similar right to speak and be heard on their views of her. There are a lot of books I would like to read, including Judyth's, but like everyone else I am constrained by time. Right now I am reading Donald Jeffries, "Hidden History: An Expose of Modern Crimes, Conspiracies, and Cover-up in American Politics." I am glad that I have taken the time to do so because I find it so outstanding and rewarding that I plan to review it on Amazon and recommend it highly, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) Larry, I do believe entertaining is the correct term. When Baker has evidence that can be verified by I shall be happy to have a look. She still has been silent on those prior mentioned unproven book sources. I agree, Camine. When Haslam's book came out I found it fascinating. It offered a realm of 'what-if's? If I had any idea that there might have been a connection between Judyth and Haslam prior to MF+TMV coming out (they are both from Bradenton, FL, it seems, and it was Haslam who brought Judyth to 60 Minutes -- just little odd coincidences like that) I would have been far more skeptical of his statements. When Judyth just walzed herself into the parallel universe Haslam had created and then demanded that everyone consider it *real* was the point where I began to call out "Whoa Nelly!" But "entertainment" it is...perhaps a new genre of romantic/sci-fi pseudo-history...:-0 Edited January 16, 2015 by Pamela Brown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I find alternative views of history endlessly fascinating. No doubt some of it is true. UFO's are a perfect example. We don't know what they are, or whether they all have a common explanation. But skeptics beware - they are real. Nazi ideology is real too, and their science was very advanced. Our sociopaths incorporated their ideology, their expertise, and their persons into our power structures. They were protected from prosecution. The question is how far do we take this? I doubt that Nazi scientists taught ours how to give cancer to Jack Ruby, or that Judyth Vary Baker was working on weaponizing cancer for use against Castro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) I felt the same way about Haslam's first book and its second edition. It was intriguing. Then it morphed into the Judyth world and that is another story entirely. I don't disagree with Mr. Caddy's point about an open "marketplace for ideas" (although I've seen that become quite literal in some instances) but I think free speech requires that we apply a great deal of critical review and some hard nosed (I'm from Missouri class skepticism) on them. You need to look at the contrary views in just as much depth as the propositions being put forth. Its way too easy to jump onto bandwagons, especially if they are going in a direction which you tend to favor. Which of course explains the success of today's news talk radio - just as a minor example. Find a view you like and tout it on your show...don't waste time actually investigating it or requiring hard data to back it up, just go with it. It creates what I think of as "fan" news...the temptation of bandwagons and "fandom" is something historical research really has to be cautious about. And yes, I am wearing my "curmudgeon" T shirt today... Edited January 16, 2015 by Larry Hancock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Roy Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 My interest lies in promoting freedom of speech and the marketplace of ideas. Judyth has a right to speak and be heard like others in the JFK community, even if what she espouses offends others for a variety of reasons. Judyth's critics have a similar right to speak and be heard on their views of her. What if it's untrue? Should false information (unsupported by the presented evidence or regarded as specious by a majority of recognized experts in the field) be seen as equal to the documented information of scholars in the field? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Knight Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I just want to remind everyone that every time we post on this topic, we bring Judyth's name to the top of the page. Yeah, my post does that, too. I would suggest that the kindest thing we can do is let this thread float back to the back of the archives here. [Just a suggestion, mind you.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 She has also refused to take a polygraph paid for by John Armstrong. (He asked me to ask her, so I did privately via fb). Dawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stephen Roy Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 She has also refused to take a polygraph paid for by John Armstrong. (He asked me to ask her, so I did privately via fb). Dawn She claims she was advised by Sixty Minutes folks never to take one. While they are not definitive, a polygraph test could certainly go a long way toward confirming or denying her story. I would pay for a polygraph myself. Her flat refusal to take one is troubling, but I think I know why she is afraid of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 John (Armstrong) also told me that when he talked to her about her claim that people mistook her from Marina he asked if she was 8 months pregnant at the time, and her response was to hang up on him. She has gone very far out of her way to try to discredit John and his work. As Pamela noted she makes it all about her. Like Pamela I was also once a supporter, when I learned that Debra Conway had her "proof"- the video of Anna, and would not return it. That aroused my suspicion, as many real witnesses have been suppressed. But I FINALLY got around to watching her TMWKK video that I had had for many years but just had not bothered to watch- the other two hours are far more interesting to me- and hearing her recount how she and Lee just began speaking Russian to each other at the post office struck me as totally false. I mean who the hell begins speaking ANY foreign language to a stranger in line at the PO? So I began looking more closely and the entire thing became false. I did enjoy her book, it was like reading a novel. Here is what I think happened. They worked together. Probably said hello or some such. So when 11/22 came she remembered her work colleague. Then as the yeas passed she began making up events, and it just grew and grew til she had inserted herself into every aspect of the story. Because it really IS "all about" Judy. She tried VERY hard to get me to come to her Dallas conference this past November. A good friend in real life was speaking there- Richard Bartholomew- and she sent me long inboxes on fb advising me that by not coming I was not supporting RB. Finally she unfriended me on fb. I think she has some serious mental health issues. Dawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now