When is Jaap's important information coming?
Jaap Holtzapffel
"inside information" Judyth Vary Baker gave me on November 4, 2003. By
"inside information" I mean:
1) Information that only Lee Oswald could have given to her;
2) Information that was not previoulsy published before in the Oswald-
literature;
3) Information that I was able to check out.
I announced this in my message "Important announcement by Jaap
Holtzapffel" on Monday, July 21, 2008.
The reason for the delay is that I am waiting for one last
confirmation. We are talking here about rebuilding Judyth Vary Baker's
credibility a little bit, so I do not want to make mistakes.
Mrs. Ferrell wrote in her message "Mary Ferrell on Judyth" 12/12/01:
"With few exceptions, Judyth's accounts of her relationship with Lee
could have been concocted from things that have been published."
When interviewing Judyth Vary Baker countless times between April,
2003 and October, 2004, I faced the same problem. But on November 4,
2003, I had my lucky day. Judyth's "inside information" proves that:
1) Judyth Vary Baker talked with Lee Oswald;
2) Judyth Vary Baker knew Lee Oswald very well, and not only, as Mrs
Ferrell believed, "Judyth knew Lee Harvey Oswald, either as a co-
worker or as an employee she remembered after the assassination".
Because the kind of information Lee Oswald gave Judyth Vary Baker,
would not have been given by one person to another person who do not
know each other very well.
The real answer to questions about Judyth Vary Baker's secret love
affair with Lee Harvey Oswald can be found in the Netherlands...
Hereby I ask Judyth Vary Baker to contact me by e-mail, because I want
to discuss the "inside information" with her before publishing it on
this Forum. If she refuses to do this, maybe Mrs. McElwain-Brown can
be our intermediary.
Jaap Holtzapffel
Grizzlie Antagonist
news:da85f1ea-664e-491d...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Oh boy! Now the three-ring circus can REALLY begin!
With three of the towering intellects of our time in charge of the matter,
what could possibly go wrong?
The trouble is that if this "inside information" is already available to
the public, there's no way to show that it wasn't derived from a public
source. And if it's NOT available to the public,then how can anyone know
whether it's true?
The only way around that would be to show that Judyth possessed the
information -- whatever it is -- BEFORE it became publicly available. I
say that she can't do it because there IS no such information. If there
was, why wouldn't she include it in her book?
Why wouldn't she have a photograph or a love letter from the man that --
after 45 years -- she still wants to spend eternity with?
What's the matter with you anyway, Jaap? I gave you the name of a debt
collection attorney in Florida because -- in a manner of speaking -- I
wanted to help you slaughter the fatted calf. Now here you are still
trying to feed her.
James K. Olmstead
"Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holt...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
news:da85f1ea-664e-491d...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> "inside information" Judyth Vary Baker gave me on November 4, 2003. By
> "inside information" I mean:
> 1) Information that only Lee Oswald could have given to her;
This is a critical aspect....one that could only be confirmed or denied by
Oswald.... IF it pertained to any of his actions that were in conjection
with his actions dealing with the assassination.
If it's info like her claims about his tooth...a dog or some other
pet...wishes hopes or deams....it's still going to be hard to "confirm"
that she gained that info "only" from Lee H. Oswald.
> 2) Information that was not previoulsy published before in the Oswald-
> literature;
With over 2,000 books/articles on the assassination published, you need to
read everyone to validate that claim.....then there are over a million
newsgroup articles/posts on the internet......I know I've author several
thousands.
> 3) Information that I was able to check out.
Several have checked out her claims and shown them to be false or
impellished.
> I announced this in my message "Important announcement by Jaap
> Holtzapffel" on Monday, July 21, 2008.
>
> The reason for the delay is that I am waiting for one last
> confirmation. We are talking here about rebuilding Judyth Vary Baker's
> credibility a little bit, so I do not want to make mistakes.
Are you speaking for a "group" using "We"? Baker's credibility has been
damaged by her own hand. I warned her years ago that those that were
supporting her were causing her more harm then good.....are you more
interested in her credibility or the money she owes you?
>
> Mrs. Ferrell wrote in her message "Mary Ferrell on Judyth" 12/12/01:
> "With few exceptions, Judyth's accounts of her relationship with Lee
> could have been concocted from things that have been published."
> When interviewing Judyth Vary Baker countless times between April,
> 2003 and October, 2004, I faced the same problem. But on November 4,
> 2003, I had my lucky day. Judyth's "inside information" proves that:
> 1) Judyth Vary Baker talked with Lee Oswald;
So did hundreds of others......read the WC.......HSCA and other works
> 2) Judyth Vary Baker knew Lee Oswald very well, and not only, as Mrs
> Ferrell believed, "Judyth knew Lee Harvey Oswald, either as a co-
> worker or as an employee she remembered after the assassination".
Just about every "co-worker" remembered LHO after the assassination.
Many also made up connections to him.
> Because the kind of information Lee Oswald gave Judyth Vary Baker,
> would not have been given by one person to another person who do not
> know each other very well.
Difficult to prove.....so this information will be interesting.....
>
> The real answer to questions about Judyth Vary Baker's secret love
> affair with Lee Harvey Oswald can be found in the Netherlands...
They sure were not in her book about the whole affair.
>
> Hereby I ask Judyth Vary Baker to contact me by e-mail, because I want
> to discuss the "inside information" with her before publishing it on
> this Forum. If she refuses to do this, maybe Mrs. McElwain-Brown can
> be our intermediary.
>
> Jaap Holtzapffel
Good luck seeing how you took her to court and want your money back.
jko
Jaap Holtzapffel
You know that I admire you sense of humor. The last thing I want to do
in my life, is finding out who you really are...
But this message proves that deep in your heart you are afraid that
someday Judyth Vary Baker will turn out to be NO liar. What would you
say to her when such a thing would happen?
Jaap Holtzapffel
Barb Junkkarinen
<j.holt...@hetnet.nl> wrote:
"Look, everbody, up in the sky, here comes another flock of migrating
pigs!"
Jaap Holtzapffel
What do you mean by that?
(Wanting my money back and believing part of Judyth's story are two
totally different things.)
Jaap Holtzapffel
Grizzlie Antagonist
> Dear Mr. Grizzlie:
>
> You know that I admire you sense of humor. The last thing I want to do
> in my life, is finding out who you really are...
No, no. When and if I feel that I've gotten to know you well enough, I
might communicate that to you privately.
> But this message proves that deep in your heart you are afraid that
> someday Judyth Vary Baker will turn out to be NO liar. What would you
> say to her when such a thing would happen?
>
> Jaap Holtzapffel
Honest to God, I am not in the least bit worried about that.
Her story is SO implausible and SO at odds with what's known about Lee
Harvey Oswald and the circumstances of Kennedy's death.
Glaring holes have already been found in it by others -- such as "Cancun"
and the instruction to write a letter to President Kennedy in May 1960
(when he was not yet president). There are probably other holes that have
been found in it as well; I am really not keeping up very avidly with the
Judyth discussion, other than to observe how some people flock to her as
though she were the Pied Piper.
It is so obvious to me that this whole thing is just a 21st Century
version of late 1960's New Left politics where the truth is sacrificed to
"the cause" -- "the cause" being rhetorical war against (what certain
people believe to be) fascist Amerika.
How would I respond if her story turns out to be true? You might as well
ask me how I would respond if hostile aliens landed in Times Square on New
Year's Eve. How can I possibly answer such a question? How can I
possibly know right now how I would respond to such a contingency?
James K. Olmstead
> Mr. Jim:
>
> What do you mean by that?
Jaap: When you cut out the previous post....it's impossible to know how
to directly answer your question........
>
> (Wanting my money back and believing part of Judyth's story are two
> totally different things.)
Sure....but I doubt that Baker would want you to share your "important
information" based on your effort to sue her. I also doubt she wants to
have any further exchange with you on any matter. So far you've shown
nothing remotely concerning "important information" except for your
efforts to track her down to collect your money.
If you had any important information that you "learned" from her back in
2004 you had over 4 years to confirm that so called "important
information".........if you haven't then your chances of working with
"anybody" to restore her credibility is about nil. So if you can't or
don't have "important information" that will restore her credibilty then
your efforts seem to relate to debt collection other than restoring
credibility.
A journalist with "important information" is one thing.....but you don't
seem to have done your homework. You should be able to lay out your
outline... on why you support her story......even if you can't prove it
when you are called to task to do so. We've been waiting years for
somebody to "prove" her story with independent research and
informatioin.........so far no "proof" has been shown. We've given you
time to at least "outline" this info.....but nada..
jko
Jaap Holtzapffel
You write: "Why wouldn't she (= Judyth Vary Baker) have a photograph
or a love letter from the man that -- after 45 years -- she still
wants to spend eternity with?"
My dear Mr. Grizzlie: people who are having a SECRET love affair,
don't write letters to one another and don't make photographs of each
other. That's too dangerous...
Jaap Holtzapffel
Jaap Holtzapffel
You write: "The only way around that would be to show that Judyth
possessed the information -- whatever it is -- BEFORE it became
publicly available."
That's right: the inside information is NOT already available to the
public.
Three people know about the inside information: Judyth Vary Baker and
two Dutch people (including me).
You write: "If there was, why wouldn't she (= Judyth Vary Baker)
include it in her book?"
First of all: I didn't read her book, because she didn't give
permission for publication, so it is worthless reading (for me). But I
am sure that Judyth did not include it in her book. Why? Because the
information seems so irrelevant that even Judyth Vary Baker did not
understand how important it would become to restore her credebility.
Jaap Holtzapffel
Pamela McElwain-Brown
You can email me at pame...@mindspring.com.
Pamela McElwain-Brown
--
www.themagicflute.org
The amazing story of the real magic flute...and my life as a musician and
teacher.
www.in-broad-daylight.com
JFK Assassination Presidential Limousine SS-100-X
"Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holt...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
news:da85f1ea-664e-491d...@i76g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Grizzlie Antagonist
I understand. The secret love affair is evidenced by the fact that there is
no evidence - which is what you would expect of a secret love affair.
Like the story of the guy with the special whistle that keeps tigers away.
When he's told that there are no tigers in the area, he boasts that this
shows how effective his whistle is.
Except that these two secret lovers, among other things, are supposed to
have openly cavorted with each other at the Roosevelt Hotel and were
supposedly on the verge of getting respective divorces or annulments so that
they could get married.
Grizzlie Antagonist
> Mr. Grizzlie:
>
> You write: "The only way around that would be to show that Judyth
> possessed the information -- whatever it is -- BEFORE it became
> publicly available."
>
> That's right: the inside information is NOT already available to the
> public.
So? What is this "inside information" and how does it prove what it's
supposed to prove?
> Three people know about the inside information: Judyth Vary Baker and
> two Dutch people (including me).
>
> You write: "If there was, why wouldn't she (= Judyth Vary Baker)
> include it in her book?"
> First of all: I didn't read her book, because she didn't give
> permission for publication, so it is worthless reading (for me). But I
> am sure that Judyth did not include it in her book. Why? Because the
> information seems so irrelevant that even Judyth Vary Baker did not
> understand how important it would become to restore her credebility.
>
> Jaap Holtzapffel
There IS no information, Jaap because none of this ever happened! Please!
Enough already!
Anthony Marsh
> "Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holt...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
> news:1a7e8cdd-ea84-4a23...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
>> Mr. Grizzlie:
>>
>> You write: "Why wouldn't she (= Judyth Vary Baker) have a photograph
>> or a love letter from the man that -- after 45 years -- she still
>> wants to spend eternity with?"
>>
>> My dear Mr. Grizzlie: people who are having a SECRET love affair,
>> don't write letters to one another and don't make photographs of each
>> other. That's too dangerous...
>>
>> Jaap Holtzapffel
>
>
> I understand. The secret love affair is evidenced by the fact that there is
> no evidence - which is what you would expect of a secret love affair.
>
Ever read Barbara Walters' book? She reveals that she had a secret love
affair with Senator Ed Brooke. How come everyone didn't know about this
secret at the time? Because then it wouldn't be a secret.
jfk...@gmail.com
wrote:
> "Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holtzapf...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
And what is your explanation for LHO's leaving his wedding ring at
home on 11.22.63?
James K. Olmstead
"Grizzlie Antagonist" <lloydso...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:gD0ok.16867$xZ....@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com...
> "Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holt...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
> news:3cf4e4e3-03e5-4588...@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> Mr. Grizzlie:
>>
>> You write: "The only way around that would be to show that Judyth
>> possessed the information -- whatever it is -- BEFORE it became
>> publicly available."
>>
>> That's right: the inside information is NOT already available to the
>> public.
>
Jaap: There seems to be a problem.....this information is "NOT already
available to the public." ...... yet three people, yourself
included........KNOW....that this "inside information" establishes (at
least in your opinion) the so called "love affair" between Baker and
Oswald.
IF this information was NOT ALREADY AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC how did you
know that this information was important and not known?
If you learned of this info first hand from Baker......you must have
verified the information already to form an honest opinion of her story.
If Baker did not know how important this information was how did you know
that it was important?
jko
Steve Thomas
Only if you tell people that the person in the picture with you is your
boyfriend instead of a co-worker. Shackelford tries this same nonsense on
Judyth's reaction "i think i saw this guy in the back at work" as if
because they "had an affair" (they didnt folks)they had to act like they
had never talked(i dont think they did). Judyth wouldnt have to blurt out
"thats my boyfriend" when she found out about Oswald. The same goes for a
picture, it only becomes a problem if you tell people the person is your
"lover" instead of just some guy at work.
>
> Jaap Holtzapffel
Steve Thomas
> Mr. Grizzlie:
>
> You write: "The only way around that would be to show that Judyth
> possessed the information -- whatever it is -- BEFORE it became
> publicly available."
>
> That's right: the inside information is NOT already available to the
> public.
Is it able to be checked? How can you confirm it if its not available?
She can say anything she wants, if there is no evidence to the contrary
does that make what she said true?
Steve Thomas
wrote:
> "Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holtzapf...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
Im enjoying this between Jaaps European English/thinking Judyth is telling
the truth, and Grizzlie's attempt to help him get his money/ knowing
Judyth is a liar.
Grizzlie Antagonist
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:_92dnRSq7rZGLD3V...@comcast.com...
> Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
>> "Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holt...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
>> news:1a7e8cdd-ea84-4a23...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
>>> Mr. Grizzlie:
>>>
>>> You write: "Why wouldn't she (= Judyth Vary Baker) have a photograph
>>> or a love letter from the man that -- after 45 years -- she still
>>> wants to spend eternity with?"
>>>
>>> My dear Mr. Grizzlie: people who are having a SECRET love affair,
>>> don't write letters to one another and don't make photographs of each
>>> other. That's too dangerous...
>>>
>>> Jaap Holtzapffel
>>
>>
>> I understand. The secret love affair is evidenced by the fact that there
>> is no evidence - which is what you would expect of a secret love affair.
>>
>
> Ever read Barbara Walters' book? She reveals that she had a secret love
> affair with Senator Ed Brooke. How come everyone didn't know about this
> secret at the time? Because then it wouldn't be a secret.
I understand how you, as a member of Team Judyth, feel about the matter.
But if the affair really did take place, I imagine that Barbara Walters
has retained some sort of tangible evidence of it. Judyth Baker has
retained no evidence of her affair with LHO for the simple reason that no
such affair took place.
And although a very good case can be made that BaBa WaWa deserves at least
as much of the same notoriety associated with Lee Harvey Oswald, the fact
is that no one is interested in her personal life and no one has
undertaken the sort of scrutiny of her life that others have given to
Oswald's, so there would be nothing remarkable about this secret affair
remaining secret for so long.
Oswald's affair with a strange woman could not possibly have remained
secret for as long as it did, given the intensive scrutiny that his life
has already received.
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
You mean the morning after he had spent all evening doing things for
Marina, taking care of the kids and trying to convince her to move
into an apartment with him so they could be a family .... and Marina,
by her own words, would have none of it and treated him terribly?
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
Exactly.
Barb :-)
>
>
>>
>> Jaap Holtzapffel
>
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
>On Aug 12, 3:13 am, "Grizzlie Antagonist" <lloydsofhanf...@yahoo.com>
That is great ... I hadn't thought of it that way! LOL
Barb :-)
Grizzlie Antagonist
news:d6a4df13-c34e-4b92...@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
He was going to kill the President of the United States or at least attempt
it.
He expected to either 1) die, 2) escape to Cuba, or 3) live the rest of his
life in prison.
He also left her some money. He was saying goodbye. He made a similar
gesture just before attempting to kill Walker.
This gesture is just one of a number of things that proves Oswald guilty.
That's guilty, guilty, guilty!
Grizzlie Antagonist
"Steve Thomas" <misled...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:c0a7d6a6-2504-4306...@j1g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
I'm getting some enjoyment out of it myself, though I really wish that this
Judyth nonsense would end. But I realize that there is still no light at
the end of the tunnel as far as that goes, so I might as well continue to
make lemonade out of this lemon.
Grizzlie Antagonist
news:2ib2a4lraeivql4on...@4ax.com...
Mind you, the only thing that I've done is to give Jaap the name of a debt
collection attorney in Florida.
Jaap Holtzapffel
I can not look into Mrs. Vary Baker's mind, but probably she never
understood how important the information is that she gave me five
years ago.
Correction: this inside information does not prove that Judyth and Lee
had a secret love affair, although I do believe it. The point with a
secret love affair that is really secret, is that there is no proof
for it.
The inside information has to do with Lee Oswald's stay in Rotterdam
from June 3, 1962 till June 4, 1962. In the Oswald-literature there is
almost no information on this subject. The inside information proves
that Judyth and Lee knew each other very well.
What I am doing right now, is finding the third person who knows about
it.
Jaap Holtzapffel
jfk...@gmail.com
wrote:
> "Anthony Marsh" <anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:_92dnRSq7rZGLD3V...@comcast.com...
>
>
>
> > Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
You don't seem to bother to read anything Anthony writes. do you? How
can you fail to observe that he is not a Judyth supporter, but working
to correct the misrepresentations of the Judyth bashers? Not the same
thing.
In addition, your ramble on LHO are your opinions, to which you are
entitled. They are not particularly insightful, though.
Anthony Marsh
As usual for a WC defender you point to anything that Oswald did which
anyone other person could have an innocent reason for doing, but in the
case of Oswald you think it must indicate guilt. In other words,
circular reasoning.
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
You ramble on (asnd on!) about "misrepresentations" made by "Judyth
bashers" but, though asked, never provide any examples to support your
assertion. If it is merely your opinion, you are entitled, if it is a
declarations, as it appears to be, then sans any samples or support,
it's particularly NON insightful, nor is it helpful to any discussion.
Barb Junkkarinen
<j.holt...@hetnet.nl> wrote:
You need more than the third person who knows about it ... you need to
be able to show that it is factual. If you have been able to confirm
whatever this "inside information" is as factual .... you don't need
any third person.
If you have not been able to confirm the information is factual, it
doesn't matter how many people line up to confirm Judyth said it.
Barb :-)
>Jaap Holtzapffel
Anthony Marsh
> "Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:_92dnRSq7rZGLD3V...@comcast.com...
>> Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
>>> "Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holt...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
>>> news:1a7e8cdd-ea84-4a23...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
>>>> Mr. Grizzlie:
>>>>
>>>> You write: "Why wouldn't she (= Judyth Vary Baker) have a photograph
>>>> or a love letter from the man that -- after 45 years -- she still
>>>> wants to spend eternity with?"
>>>>
>>>> My dear Mr. Grizzlie: people who are having a SECRET love affair,
>>>> don't write letters to one another and don't make photographs of each
>>>> other. That's too dangerous...
>>>>
>>>> Jaap Holtzapffel
>>>
>>> I understand. The secret love affair is evidenced by the fact that there
>>> is no evidence - which is what you would expect of a secret love affair.
>>>
>> Ever read Barbara Walters' book? She reveals that she had a secret love
>> affair with Senator Ed Brooke. How come everyone didn't know about this
>> secret at the time? Because then it wouldn't be a secret.
>
>
> I understand how you, as a member of Team Judyth, feel about the matter.
>
There you go again with the false charges. Flame baiting. When I don't
believe 87% of her story, how can I be a member of this imaginary Team
Judyth? Nonsense.
> But if the affair really did take place, I imagine that Barbara Walters
> has retained some sort of tangible evidence of it. Judyth Baker has
> retained no evidence of her affair with LHO for the simple reason that no
> such affair took place.
>
Another professional denier weighs in and wonders if the affair really
did take place. Did Walters publish any tangible evidence for it?
> And although a very good case can be made that BaBa WaWa deserves at least
> as much of the same notoriety associated with Lee Harvey Oswald, the fact
> is that no one is interested in her personal life and no one has
> undertaken the sort of scrutiny of her life that others have given to
> Oswald's, so there would be nothing remarkable about this secret affair
> remaining secret for so long.
>
The point of the comparison is that a woman can have a secret affair and
not reveal it for 40 years.
> Oswald's affair with a strange woman could not possibly have remained
> secret for as long as it did, given the intensive scrutiny that his life
> has already received.
>
Nonsense.
>
William Yates
That's not a bad idea.
> How
> can you fail to observe that he is not a Judyth supporter, but working
> to correct the misrepresentations of the Judyth bashers?
He's not correcting anything. It's just his usual uninformed belligerence.
> Not the same
> thing.
>
> In addition, your ramble on LHO are your opinions, to which you are
> entitled. They are not particularly insightful, though.
Actually, this is one of those very rare times Grizzlie says something
that makes sense. It doesn't happen often, so you might want to mark your
calendar.
James K. Olmstead
> Dear Mr. Jim:
Jaap......just Jim....no Mr. I'm a friendly type of guy and this newsgroup
is basically informal.
>
> I can not look into Mrs. Vary Baker's mind, but probably she never
> understood how important the information is that she gave me five
> years ago.
Then there's still a problem.....you HAD to know at least the basic's
concerning this insight PRIOR to her mentioning it. A light bulb had to
go on in the back of your mind to know it was important. Therefore you
had to have learned the basic prior to contact with Baker. Unless you had
some connection to Oswald during the period in question, you had to gain
this knowledge from the public domain.
>
> Correction: this inside information does not prove that Judyth and Lee
> had a secret love affair, although I do believe it.
Thanks for being honest......there is no proof what-so-ever of any secret
love affair between Baker and Oswald........it's total fiction.....unless
validated by some fact.
The point with a
> secret love affair that is really secret, is that there is no proof
> for it.
Claiming such however does not make it possible to have happened. Her
story is so out of touch with real life, concerning this affair, it
borders the absurd.
> The inside information has to do with Lee Oswald's stay in Rotterdam
> from June 3, 1962 till June 4, 1962.
I see a 24 hr script.....American TV series....in flashback. Baker had no
contact with Oswald during this period.....so anything she had to say
concerning this time period would be interesting. I don't know what she
says concerning Oswald in her book concerning this....but if she discussed
it with you and learned that it was "important information" she should
have mentioned it in her book.
In the Oswald-literature there is
> almost no information on this subject.
It's a short period of time and it is covered by investigation....so it
hard to say that there is no information on the subject.....it's
information that requires going beyond the offical investigations and I
believe Epstein in his book "Legend" covers the basic of the stay in
Amsterdam. Marina describes the apartment, the church bells and that the
apt was recommended by an AE offical.
The inside information proves
> that Judyth and Lee knew each other very well.
It is possible that it would also be information that Marina would have,
since she was with him during this period and there is no indication that
they were apart during this time period. McMillan also covers the basics
of this period in Marina and Lee.
>
> What I am doing right now, is finding the third person who knows about
> it.
Have you contacted Marina? There is no data that I know of that indicates
that they were not together the whole period in Amsterdam.
The landlady of the apartment might be dead as well as others...however
there is little indication that the landlady would have any info on Oswald
that would prove that Lee told Baker anything about this period. It was
one of the happiest periods of the Oswald's lives.....so it's hard to
imagine anything interesting that one "lover" would tell another "lover".
jko
Steve Thomas
Sure it is, he attacks anyone who says anything negative about Judyth.
Name me someone who he hasnt done that with? O thats right Pam your a
Judyth supporter also, so in your opinion nothing negative should be said
about Judyth in the first place. When someone provides documentation that
points to Judyth lying its labled "misrepresentations" by Tony and the
rest of Team Judyth. The problem is the misrepresentations made by Team
Judyth, about ANYONE who calls Judyth a liar even though everyone knows
that she IS a liar, and also the misrepresentations about what little
documentation is available. How does that crap on Tony's webpage documents
anything about her JFK/ Castro claims? It doesn't, but somehow its been
MISREPRESENTED by Team Judyth in order to claim so.
Steve Thomas
> >news:_92dnRSq7rZGLD3V...@comcast.com...
> >> Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
Tell that to John Edwards.
>
>
>
> - Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dave Reitzes
> Dear Mr. Jim:
>
> I can not look into Mrs. Vary Baker's mind, but probably she never
> understood how important the information is that she gave me five
> years ago.
>
> Correction: this inside information does not prove that Judyth and Lee
> had a secret love affair, although I do believe it.
You were right, Barb (er, sorry, "Marina") -- this guy IS a hoot.
\:^)
The point with a
> secret love affair that is really secret, is that there is no proof
> for it.
>
> The inside information has to do with Lee Oswald's stay in Rotterdam
> from June 3, 1962 till June 4, 1962. In the Oswald-literature there is
> almost no information on this subject. The inside information proves
> that Judyth and Lee knew each other very well.
>
> What I am doing right now, is finding the third person who knows about
> it.
>
> Jaap Holtzapffel
Dave
Grizzlie Antagonist
<jfk...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5f44039f-bfae-49dc...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
I give his material the same careful consideration that he gives mine.
> How
> can you fail to observe that he is not a Judyth supporter,
By making SURE that I give his material the same careful consideration
that he gives mine.
> but working
> to correct the misrepresentations of the Judyth bashers? Not the same
> thing.
To paraphrase something that JFK said to Bertrand Russell during the Cuban
Missile Crisis, I think that Marsh's attention might well be directed to
the burglars rather than to those who have caught the burglars.
I just quoted JFK!!!!!!!! I'll have to burn the typing fingers off of my
hand!
> In addition, your ramble on LHO are your opinions, to which you are
> entitled.
No, they are facts, not opinions. "Willie Mays was a better centerfielder
than Mickey Mantle" is an opinion. "Willie Mays hit more home runs than
Mickey Mantle" is a fact. "Mickey Mantle hit more home runs than Willie
Mays" is also a fact, though a demonstrably false one.
"LHO did this, that, and other things, as a prelude to shooting JFK" is
also a fact, though not quite as demonstrably true or false as recorded
home run totals, but the statement, taken as a whole, is based on a number
of facts.
> They are not particularly insightful, though.
They're old news.
Grizzlie Antagonist
By itself, the gesture would mean very little.
Taken in the context of everything else, of course it's indicative of
guilt. Of course, I'm not telling you anything that you don't already
know.
Grizzlie Antagonist
> Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
>> "Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:_92dnRSq7rZGLD3V...@comcast.com...
>>> Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
>>>> "Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holt...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
>>>> news:1a7e8cdd-ea84-4a23...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> Mr. Grizzlie:
>>>>>
>>>>> You write: "Why wouldn't she (= Judyth Vary Baker) have a photograph
>>>>> or a love letter from the man that -- after 45 years -- she still
>>>>> wants to spend eternity with?"
>>>>>
>>>>> My dear Mr. Grizzlie: people who are having a SECRET love affair,
>>>>> don't write letters to one another and don't make photographs of each
>>>>> other. That's too dangerous...
>>>>>
>>>>> Jaap Holtzapffel
>>>>
>>>> I understand. The secret love affair is evidenced by the fact that
>>>> there is no evidence - which is what you would expect of a secret love
>>>> affair.
>>>>
>>> Ever read Barbara Walters' book? She reveals that she had a secret love
>>> affair with Senator Ed Brooke. How come everyone didn't know about this
>>> secret at the time? Because then it wouldn't be a secret.
>>
>>
>> I understand how you, as a member of Team Judyth, feel about the matter.
>>
>
> There you go again with the false charges. Flame baiting. When I don't
> believe 87% of her story, how can I be a member of this imaginary Team
> Judyth? Nonsense.
Oh, does that cause you pain, Anthony Marsh?
Does that cause you pain?
How does it feel to be misinterpreted? Does it hurt?
Even worse, I guess that you think that I disregarded what you really had
to say. I guess that you think I ignored your true opinion in order to
deliberately misinterpret you. How did it feel? Did you feel just a
little bit violated by the process?
Grizzlie Antagonist
"William Yates" <william_...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ZtOdnRhHh6AVaDzV...@earthlink.com...
There must be a lot of travel agents that would be happy to guide you to a
portion of the world where you don't have to read anything that I have to
say.
Pamela McElwain-Brown
news:48a1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
This is becoming hilarious. I have been attempting to contact Marina for
some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only Marina can
verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on this group,
where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two, who are in touch
with Marina and refuse to help me.
Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just
ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to begin
with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
Pamela McElwain-Brown
www.in-broad-daylight.com
Barb Junkkarinen
<pame...@mindspring.com> wrote:
Has it occurred to you that no one has put you in contact with Marina
because Marina does not want to talk to you?
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> On 13 Aug 2008 00:29:52 -0400, "Pamela McElwain-Brown"
>
> >This is becoming hilarious. �I have been attempting to contact Marina for
> >some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only Marina can
> >verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on this group,
> >where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two, who are in touch
> >with Marina and refuse to help me.
>
> Has it occurred to you that no one has put you in contact with Marina
> because Marina does not want to talk to you?
I think a more pertinent question might be, why would anyone at this
forum want to help the person who authored the following message?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f69e8971bb8630b0?hl=en&dmode=source
<QUOTE ON>------------------------------------------------
From: jfk279x <jfk2...@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
Subject: Re: JUDYTH: MEDEC-ZOA
Date: 5 Jul 2008 01:05:09 -0400
Gossip is interfering with Dave's ability to comprehend.
I do not post research on aaj.
<QUOTE OFF>-----------------------------------------------
> >Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just
> >ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to begin
> >with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>
> >Pamela McElwain-Brown
> >www.in-broad-daylight.com
Pamela doesn't post research on aaj, but she frequently attacks people
who do.
Dave
Jaap Holtzapffel
Judyth Vary Baker is more important than you hope or think.
She is the only witness still alive who has the courage to speak in
public.
Jaap Holtzapffel
Steve Thomas
wrote:
> "James K. Olmstead" <jolmst...@neo.rr.com> wrote in messagenews:48a1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holtzapf...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
Marina refuses to help you because she knows you are a Team Judyth
member and she knows Judyth is a quack.
>
> Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just
> ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to begin
> with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>
> Pamela McElwain-Brownwww.in-broad-daylight.com- Hide quoted text -
Grizzlie Antagonist
> Dear Mr. Grizzlie:
>
> Judyth Vary Baker is more important than you hope or think.
Judyth Vary Baker is considerably less important than Judyth Vary
Baker hopes or thinks.
> She is the only witness still alive who has the courage to speak in
> public.
>
> Jaap Holtzapffel
Now if only she could find the courage to shut up.
James K. Olmstead
"Pamela McElwain-Brown" <pame...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:QtqdnYiatMSjwD_V...@earthlink.com...
I have laughed at you....but not because of any unknown to me efforts on
your part to contact Marina. She lives in Dallas....and last I knew
worked in a Army Surplus store. She does not live in a locked box....to
be opened only by CT's with a key. I bet she is contacted several times a
year by journalist (such as Jaap) concerning specific points of her life.
It is only natural to ask if he made the effort to contact her....since
she was in fact with Oswald during this 24 hr period.
>
> Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just ring her up, about information which you don't
> believe Judyth has to begin with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
However Jaap is not Baker....he is by his own claim a journalist...with
important inside information that needs to be confirmed. Marina was the
only known person with a intimate relationship with Oswald during this
period.....in order to do a proffessional article or whatever he needs to
contact Marina......it's basic journalism 101.
jko
Anthony Marsh
The fact remains that that is YOUR debating style.
> Even worse, I guess that you think that I disregarded what you really had
> to say. I guess that you think I ignored your true opinion in order to
> deliberately misinterpret you. How did it feel? Did you feel just a
> little bit violated by the process?
>
>
It says a lot about the weakness of your position.
Anthony Marsh
As usual you manipulate the evidence to fit your preconceived conclusion.
Anthony Marsh
No, that is a false syllogism. You use the conclusion to define the
premises.
Anthony Marsh
Oswald was not running for office and being followed by the press.
Anthony Marsh
Team McAdams says a lot of negative things about Judyth which I ignore.
When they misrepresent the facts or employ disreputable tactics, that is
what I complain about.
jfk...@gmail.com
> On Aug 13, 12:47 am, Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> > On 13 Aug 2008 00:29:52 -0400, "Pamela McElwain-Brown"
>
> > <pamel...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > >This is becoming hilarious. I have been attempting to contact Marina for
> > >some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only Marina can
> > >verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on this group,
> > >where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two, who are in touch
> > >with Marina and refuse to help me.
>
> > Has it occurred to you that no one has put you in contact with Marina
> > because Marina does not want to talk to you?
Why then would Marina want to talk to Jaap?
>
> I think a more pertinent question might be, why would anyone at this
> forum want to help the person who authored the following message?
I have made it plain on aaj that because of the ongoing flaming I don't
consider it a worthwhile venue for research.
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f69e8971bb86...
>
> <QUOTE ON>------------------------------------------------
>
> From: jfk279x <jfk2...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
> Subject: Re: JUDYTH: MEDEC-ZOA
> Date: 5 Jul 2008 01:05:09 -0400
>
> Gossip is interfering with Dave's ability to comprehend.
>
> I do not post research on aaj.
>
> <QUOTE OFF>-----------------------------------------------
>
> > >Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just
> > >ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to begin
> > >with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>
> > >Pamela McElwain-Brown
> > >www.in-broad-daylight.com
>
> Pamela doesn't post research on aaj, but she frequently attacks people
> who do.
>
The distortions need to be addressed.
Steve Thomas
Wait a second dude. I thought a month or 2 ago you said she made up the
CIA part of her story, and that you just believed she had an affair and
that was it. Did you change your mind Jaap? When you say "She is the only
witness still alive who has the courage to speak" what was she a witness
to?
>
> Jaap Holtzapffel
Grizzlie Antagonist
Is it indeed?
>> Even worse, I guess that you think that I disregarded what you really had
>> to say. I guess that you think I ignored your true opinion in order to
>> deliberately misinterpret you. How did it feel? Did you feel just a
>> little bit violated by the process?
>>
>>
>
> It says a lot about the weakness of your position.
Keep sawing that limb that you're sitting at the edge of, Marsh. Maybe
the rest of the tree will fall down and leave you suspended in mid-air.
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
>On Aug 13, 10:10 am, Dave Reitzes <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 13, 12:47 am, Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On 13 Aug 2008 00:29:52 -0400, "Pamela McElwain-Brown"
>>
>> > <pamel...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>> > >This is becoming hilarious. I have been attempting to contact Marina for
>> > >some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only Marina can
>> > >verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on this group,
>> > >where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two, who are in touch
>> > >with Marina and refuse to help me.
>>
>> > Has it occurred to you that no one has put you in contact with Marina
>> > because Marina does not want to talk to you?
>
>Why then would Marina want to talk to Jaap?
Who says she does want to talk to him?
Pamela McElwain-Brown
I don't live in Dallas and would not want to pounce on her unawares at her
place of work anyhow. If it is true as Barb and Dave are implying that she
knows I would like to talk with her and chooses not to talk with me, that is
her choice.
I do have to wonder why, as I am one of those who watched LHO being killed
in front of me on tv and have invested a good part of the last 20 years, not
to mention tens of thousands of dollars, doing everything I can to
demonstrate his innocence and changing the focus of the crime scene in the
public eye from the TSBD to the Presidential Limousine, so my credentials as
a CT aren't all that bad.
However, I do keep an open mind to what Judyth has to say, and I do consider
her statements a missing piece of the puzzle of the events in NOLA in the
summer of 1963.
I do have to wonder if Marina is choosing on her own to remain silent about
Judyth or she is being advised by others to do so. I do have to wonder
whether if those who are perpetrating the slimy attacks against Judyth are
doing so because they believe they are protecting Marina.
> I bet she is contacted several times a year by journalist (such as Jaap)
> concerning specific points of her life. It is only natural to ask if he
> made the effort to contact her....since she was in fact with Oswald during
> this 24 hr period.
Jaap believes Judyth and LHO were involved. Does Marina want to discuss
this with anyone, much less someone who believes Judyth in this regard?
>
>>
>> Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just
>> ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to
>> begin with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>
> However Jaap is not Baker....he is by his own claim a journalist...with
> important inside information that needs to be confirmed. Marina was the
> only known person with a intimate relationship with Oswald during this
> period.....in order to do a proffessional article or whatever he needs to
> contact Marina......it's basic journalism 101.
You are an optimist, and I hope that you are right. But this is also
Ongoing Cover-up 101, and even if Marina were to want to speak up she may
not.
Pamela McElwain-Brown
www.in-broad-daylight.com
Dave Reitzes
> On Aug 13, 10:10 am, Dave Reitzes <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 13, 12:47 am, Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On 13 Aug 2008 00:29:52 -0400, "Pamela McElwain-Brown"
>
> > > <pamel...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > > >This is becoming hilarious. I have been attempting to contact Marina for
> > > >some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only Marina can
> > > >verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on this group,
> > > >where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two, who are in touch
> > > >with Marina and refuse to help me.
>
> > > Has it occurred to you that no one has put you in contact with Marina
> > > because Marina does not want to talk to you?
>
> Why then would Marina want to talk to Jaap?
Who says Marina wants to talk with Jaap?
> > I think a more pertinent question might be, why would anyone at this
> > forum want to help the person who authored the following message?
>
> I have made it plain on aaj that because of the ongoing flaming I don't
> consider it a worthwhile venue for research.
Yet you beg for our help.
> >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f69e8971bb86...
>
> > <QUOTE ON>------------------------------------------------
>
> > From: jfk279x <jfk2...@gmail.com>
> > Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
> > Subject: Re: JUDYTH: MEDEC-ZOA
> > Date: 5 Jul 2008 01:05:09 -0400
>
> > Gossip is interfering with Dave's ability to comprehend.
>
> > I do not post research on aaj.
>
> > <QUOTE OFF>-----------------------------------------------
>
> > > >Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just
> > > >ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to begin
> > > >with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>
> > > >Pamela McElwain-Brown
> > > >www.in-broad-daylight.com
>
> > Pamela doesn't post research on aaj, but she frequently attacks people
> > who do.
>
> The distortions need to be addressed.
What distortions?
Dave
Steve Thomas
> On Aug 13, 10:10 am, Dave Reitzes <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 13, 12:47 am, Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On 13 Aug 2008 00:29:52 -0400, "Pamela McElwain-Brown"
>
> > > <pamel...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > > >This is becoming hilarious. I have been attempting to contact Marina for
> > > >some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only Marina can
> > > >verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on this group,
> > > >where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two, who are in touch
> > > >with Marina and refuse to help me.
>
> > > Has it occurred to you that no one has put you in contact with Marina
> > > because Marina does not want to talk to you?
>
> Why then would Marina want to talk to Jaap?
Who told you Marina wanted to talk to Jaap?
>
>
>
> > I think a more pertinent question might be, why would anyone at this
> > forum want to help the person who authored the following message?
>
> I have made it plain on aaj that because of the ongoing flaming I don't
> consider it a worthwhile venue for research.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f69e8971bb86...
>
> > <QUOTE ON>------------------------------------------------
>
> > From: jfk279x <jfk2...@gmail.com>
> > Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
> > Subject: Re: JUDYTH: MEDEC-ZOA
> > Date: 5 Jul 2008 01:05:09 -0400
>
> > Gossip is interfering with Dave's ability to comprehend.
>
> > I do not post research on aaj.
>
> > <QUOTE OFF>-----------------------------------------------
>
> > > >Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just
> > > >ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to begin
> > > >with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>
> > > >Pamela McElwain-Brown
> > > >www.in-broad-daylight.com
>
> > Pamela doesn't post research on aaj, but she frequently attacks people
> > who do.
>
> The distortions need to be addressed.
Yes we all agree Pam, now who is going to take the blame for all
the distortions and misrepresentations regarding Judyth's 700+ page
work of fiction that was offered to the public as history? Who can we
hold accountable, and who will addresss this attempted bamboozelment
by Team Judyth members of the JFK research community?
Martin Shackelford
She wrote it; she went through every chapter making corrections before
publication.
The "lack of permission" was a business matter, and had nothing to do
with her approval of the text, which she praised in August 2005.
Martin
"Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holt...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
news:3cf4e4e3-03e5-4588...@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> Mr. Grizzlie:
>
> You write: "The only way around that would be to show that Judyth
> possessed the information -- whatever it is -- BEFORE it became
> publicly available."
>
> That's right: the inside information is NOT already available to the
> public.
> Three people know about the inside information: Judyth Vary Baker and
> two Dutch people (including me).
>
> You write: "If there was, why wouldn't she (= Judyth Vary Baker)
> include it in her book?"
> First of all: I didn't read her book, because she didn't give
> permission for publication, so it is worthless reading (for me). But I
> am sure that Judyth did not include it in her book. Why? Because the
> information seems so irrelevant that even Judyth Vary Baker did not
> understand how important it would become to restore her credebility.
>
> Jaap Holtzapffel
>
William Yates
What distortions?
Martin Shackelford
Martin
"Steve Thomas" <misled...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:2781e8bf-c1ac-4226...@k36g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
Jaap Holtzapffel
Last night I had a wonderful dream:
It is March, 2009. A call from The White House: "Dear Mr. Holtzapffel,
you are invited by President Obama to spend the next weekend with him,
his wife and two children at Camp David."
After my arrival, President Obama says: "Hello Jaap, did you know that
we discussed some things on the Internet last year? You see, my alias
is Mr. Grizzlie Antagonist!"
Yes, it was a wonderful dream. But also a strange one...
Jaap Holtzapffel
Steve Thomas
bullshit, it took you years to admit Judyth lied about the letter
someone told you to go find, and you still wont admit you were given
the idea to get the letter. You still think Judyth didnt have Oswald
saying she should go to Cancun and stay in a fine hotel. Just admit
the simple facts frist Marsh, then people will take you seriously.
P.S. Everyone is still waiting for you to attack fellow Team Judyth
members for their misrepresentations, when can we expect that?
Steve Thomas
>
> > On Aug 13, 12:47 am, Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On 13 Aug 2008 00:29:52 -0400, "Pamela McElwain-Brown"
>
> > > <pamel...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > > >This is becoming hilarious. I have been attempting to contact Marina for
> > > >some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only Marina can
> > > >verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on this group,
> > > >where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two, who are in touch
> > > >with Marina and refuse to help me.
>
> > > Has it occurred to you that no one has put you in contact with Marina
> > > because Marina does not want to talk to you?
>
> Why then would Marina want to talk to Jaap?
>
>
>
> > I think a more pertinent question might be, why would anyone at this
> > forum want to help the person who authored the following message?
>
> I have made it plain on aaj that because of the ongoing flaming I don't
> consider it a worthwhile venue for research.
but you do consider it a worthwile venue to leech for contacts and
witnesses, thats for admitting that.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f69e8971bb86...
>
> > <QUOTE ON>------------------------------------------------
>
> > From: jfk279x <jfk2...@gmail.com>
> > Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
> > Subject: Re: JUDYTH: MEDEC-ZOA
> > Date: 5 Jul 2008 01:05:09 -0400
>
> > Gossip is interfering with Dave's ability to comprehend.
>
> > I do not post research on aaj.
>
> > <QUOTE OFF>-----------------------------------------------
>
> > > >Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just
> > > >ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to begin
> > > >with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>
> > > >Pamela McElwain-Brown
> > > >www.in-broad-daylight.com
>
> > Pamela doesn't post research on aaj, but she frequently attacks people
> > who do.
>
> The distortions need to be addressed.- Hide quoted text -
William Yates
information she provides clearly shows Judyth is lying, what are you
going to do?
Jaap Holtzapffel
Don't try to insult my intelligence...
Judyth Vary Baker was a witness to Lee Harvey Oswald's New Orleans
period during the summer of 1963. And it was quite an important
period...
Jaap Holtzapffel
Jaap Holtzapffel
I am not interested in an interview with Marina Porter. Everyone on
this Forum knows or should know that Marina -- for whatever reasons --
is or has been an unreliable witness. Also in relation to their stay
in Rotterdam: Marina has said that they stayed in Amsterdam for three
days, but it was in Rotterdam for one and a half day.
So I have nothing to ask her: I am a professional journalist...
Jaap Holtzapffel
English
wrote:
> This gesture is just one of a number of things that proves Oswald guilty.
> That's guilty, guilty, guilty!
>
Maybe. Maybe not.
Grizzlie Antagonist
Yecch! A nightmare for me! I wouldn't want to wake up in the morning
and see Michelle lying next to me.
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
When pigs can not only fly, but do aerial acrobatics as well. <g>
Barb :-)
paul seaton
"Martin Shackelford" <msh...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:WBRok.18229$mh5....@nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com...
> Not what a friend of hers told me.
What did the friend of hers tell you , dude ?
Via what medium ?
When?
James K. Olmstead
There are planes trains and automobiles that go to Dallas.....I travel even
though I'm disabled.
Barb's or Dave opinion are one thing....but if I really had to talk to Marina
I'd find the means to do so regardless of "implied opinions".
>
> I do have to wonder why, as I am one of those who watched LHO being killed in front of me on tv and have invested a
> good part of the last 20 years, not to mention tens of thousands of dollars, doing everything I can to demonstrate his
> innocence and changing the focus of the crime scene in the public eye from the TSBD to the Presidential Limousine, so
> my credentials as a CT aren't all that bad.
Join the club many of us have done the same thing. However you can't just change
the "focus" of the various elements of the crime scene because you feel that
one element is more important then another, researchers will select key areas but
you can't forget about the importance of other topics. As to Oswald's "innocence"
he was "involved" so you can't demonstrate any innocence on his part.
As to your CT credentials.....I didn't know you were required to have any in order
to investigate a major historical event.
>
> However, I do keep an open mind to what Judyth has to say, and I do consider her statements a missing piece of the
> puzzle of the events in NOLA in the summer of 1963.
You've been asked several times to explain those statements you feel validate
her story and have failed to do so. If her statements are not backed up by
evidence or testimony....they can not be considered " a missing piece of the
puzzle".......they are statements she has express but has failed to support.
>
> I do have to wonder if Marina is choosing on her own to remain silent about Judyth or she is being advised by others
> to do so.
Ask her.
I do have to wonder
> whether if those who are perpetrating the slimy attacks against Judyth are doing so because they believe they are
> protecting Marina.
I don't believe that there are too many people on this newsgroup that are in
contact with Marina.....I know Ray calls her and yet I don't believe he has
ever posted anything about Baker.
>
>> I bet she is contacted several times a year by journalist (such as Jaap) concerning specific points of her life. It
>> is only natural to ask if he made the effort to contact her....since she was in fact with Oswald during this 24 hr
>> period.
>
> Jaap believes Judyth and LHO were involved. Does Marina want to discuss this with anyone, much less someone who
> believes Judyth in this regard?
If she wants to know I don't see why not.....the point is on this specific point
of time (24 hour period in Amsterdam) Jaap needs to make the effort to
contact her since she was in fact there.
>>
>>>
>>> Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just ring her up, about information which you
>>> don't believe Judyth has to begin with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>>
>> However Jaap is not Baker....he is by his own claim a journalist...with important inside information that needs to be
>> confirmed. Marina was the only known person with a intimate relationship with Oswald during this period.....in order
>> to do a proffessional article or whatever he needs to contact Marina......it's basic journalism 101.
>
> You are an optimist, and I hope that you are right. But this is also Ongoing Cover-up 101, and even if Marina were to
> want to speak up she may not.
Jaap will never know unless he trys......since he hasn't mentioned it in any past
thread or post...chances are he hasn't.....but without making the effort few will
accept his "opinion" on this issue.
jko
>
> Pamela McElwain-Brown
> www.in-broad-daylight.com
>
>
Russ Burr
I wouldn't advise anyone talking to Marina. She's comfortable with what
she believes to be the truth. Other than that, she's rather close minded
and uncooperative, ie. unless you accept what she believes.
But be my guest and call her. She lives outside Dallas. I don't know if
she still works in Dallas at the Army/Navy surplus store. I interviewed
her 10 years ago and she was very difficult.
If you do and bring up this Baker nonsense she'll either laugh at you or
hang up. Just my opinion.
Good luck.
RB
Barb Junkkarinen
<jolm...@neo.rr.com> wrote:
Yup! And there are a lot of ways and means to explore before having to
pack a bag. Pamela wants someone to hand her Marina on a platter;
without that, is she really clueless about ways to go about it?
Barb :-)
James K. Olmstead
> Dear Jim:
>
> I am not interested in an interview with Marina Porter.
That inciates that you are not interested in learning the truth concerning
this time period. She was there.
Everyone on
> this Forum knows or should know that Marina -- for whatever reasons --
> is or has been an unreliable witness.
I'd take her account over Baker's any day.
Also in relation to their stay
> in Rotterdam: Marina has said that they stayed in Amsterdam for three
> days, but it was in Rotterdam for one and a half day.
Provide a quote for this.....the time period was investigated and she was
questioned on the events....perhaps she meant the entire period of travel
to Amsterdam.
>
> So I have nothing to ask her: I am a professional journalist...
So you claim....yet you don't bother to or desire to talk to Marina who
was actually there and involved with Oswald at the time.....shame shame.
jko
>
> Jaap Holtzapffel
>
Anthony Marsh
Yeah, maybe if you have a lot of money and are on the government
approved travel list.
> Barb's or Dave opinion are one thing....but if I really had to talk to Marina
> I'd find the means to do so regardless of "implied opinions".
>
And exactly what do you want to demand that Marina say? You want to try
to force her to call Judyth a liar?
If Marina did not even know about Judyth at the time, what could she
possibly contribute?
> jko
>
>> Pamela McElwain-Brown
>> www.in-broad-daylight.com
>>
>>
>
>
>
jfk...@gmail.com
> On Aug 13, 11:19 pm, "jfk2...@gmail.com" <jfk2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 13, 10:10 am, Dave Reitzes <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 13, 12:47 am, Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > On 13 Aug 2008 00:29:52 -0400, "Pamela McElwain-Brown"
>
> > > > <pamel...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > > > >This is becoming hilarious. I have been attempting to contact Marina for
> > > > >some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only Marina can
> > > > >verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on this group,
> > > > >where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two, who are in touch
> > > > >with Marina and refuse to help me.
>
> > > > Has it occurred to you that no one has put you in contact with Marina
> > > > because Marina does not want to talk to you?
>
> > Why then would Marina want to talk to Jaap?
>
> Who says Marina wants to talk with Jaap?
Nobody. jko suggested Jaap call her. Try to keep up.
>
> > > I think a more pertinent question might be, why would anyone at this
> > > forum want to help the person who authored the following message?
>
> > I have made it plain on aaj that because of the ongoing flaming I don't
> > consider it a worthwhile venue for research.
>
> Yet you beg for our help.
What is that supposed to mean?
>
>
>
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f69e8971bb86...
>
> > > <QUOTE ON>------------------------------------------------
>
> > > From: jfk279x <jfk2...@gmail.com>
> > > Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
> > > Subject: Re: JUDYTH: MEDEC-ZOA
> > > Date: 5 Jul 2008 01:05:09 -0400
>
> > > Gossip is interfering with Dave's ability to comprehend.
>
> > > I do not post research on aaj.
>
> > > <QUOTE OFF>-----------------------------------------------
>
> > > > >Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just
> > > > >ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to begin
> > > > >with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>
> > > > >Pamela McElwain-Brown
> > > > >www.in-broad-daylight.com
>
> > > Pamela doesn't post research on aaj, but she frequently attacks people
> > > who do.
>
> > The distortions need to be addressed.
>
> What distortions?
Start with the flaming headers you are currently writing about Martin
and Howard. Add to that all of the WCR apologist diatribes.
Pure propaganda that you claim to be 'truth' and 'evidence'.
Anthony Marsh
Why in the world would Marina know anything about Judyth?
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> I don't live in Dallas and would not want to pounce on her unawares at her
> place of work anyhow. �If it is true as Barb and Dave are implying that she
> knows I would like to talk with her and chooses not to talk with me, that is
> her choice.
I have no reason to believe Marina has ever heard of you. Or me, for
that matter.
Dave
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> More ridiculous statements about her book.
> She wrote it; she went through every chapter making corrections before
> publication.
Could you kindly explain the part about her writing a letter to the
Kennedy White House in May 1960?
Thanks in advance.
> The "lack of permission" was a business matter, and had nothing to do
> with her approval of the text, which she praised in August 2005.
>
> Martin
>
> "Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holtzapf...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
>
> news:3cf4e4e3-03e5-4588...@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Mr. Grizzlie:
>
> > You write: "The only way around that would be to show that Judyth
> > possessed the information -- whatever it is -- BEFORE it became
> > publicly available."
>
> > That's right: the inside information is NOT already available to the
> > public.
> > Three people know about the inside information: Judyth Vary Baker and
> > two Dutch people (including me).
>
> > You write: "If there was, why wouldn't she (= Judyth Vary Baker)
> > include it in her book?"
> > First of all: I didn't read her book, because she didn't give
> > permission for publication, so it is worthless reading (for me). But I
> > am sure that Judyth did not include it in her book. Why? Because the
> > information seems so irrelevant that even Judyth Vary Baker did not
> > understand how important it would become to restore her credebility.
>
> > Jaap Holtzapffel
Dave
jfk...@gmail.com
Maybe you are right, since my request has been greeted with ridicule.
Dave Reitzes
> in front of me on tv
This is part of your CT "credentials"?
Interesting wording, by the way. Do all literally believe that all
events you watch on TV happen right in front of you?
and have invested a good part of the last 20 years, not
> to mention tens of thousands of dollars, doing everything I can to
> demonstrate his innocence
What have you done to demonstrate Oswald's innocence?
and changing the focus of the crime scene in the
> public eye from the TSBD to the Presidential Limousine, so my credentials as
> a CT aren't all that bad.
What is your documentation for the statement that "the focus of the
crime scene in the public eye" has ever been the TSBD?
What documentation indicates that you have changed that perception?
> However, I do keep an open mind to what Judyth has to say, and I do consider
> her statements a missing piece of the puzzle of the events in NOLA in the
> summer of 1963.
>
> I do have to wonder if Marina is choosing on her own to remain silent about
> Judyth or she is being advised by others to do so. �
Why? Do you suspect some kind of conspiracy in the matter?
I do have to wonder
> whether if those who are perpetrating the slimy attacks against Judyth
What slimy attacks?
are
> doing so because they believe they are protecting Marina.
What makes you think any researchers would want to protect Marina?
Dave
jfk...@gmail.com
> On Aug 14, 10:19 am, "jfk2...@gmail.com" <jfk2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 13, 10:10 am, Dave Reitzes <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 13, 12:47 am, Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > On 13 Aug 2008 00:29:52 -0400, "Pamela McElwain-Brown"
>
> > > > <pamel...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > > > >This is becoming hilarious. I have been attempting to contact Marina for
> > > > >some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only Marina can
> > > > >verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on this group,
> > > > >where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two, who are in touch
> > > > >with Marina and refuse to help me.
>
> > > > Has it occurred to you that no one has put you in contact with Marina
> > > > because Marina does not want to talk to you?
>
> > Why then would Marina want to talk to Jaap?
>
> Who told you Marina wanted to talk to Jaap?
You've missed the point. jko blithely suggested that Jaap talk to
Marina.
Judyth's book is her witness statement and her product.
Who of your imaginary "Team Judyth" is demanding that you burn the WCR and
place Judyth's book on your mantel in posts 24-7? Nobody. You are
perfectly free to ignore her book or read it as you like.
You and others here though, spearheaded by Barb, have attempted to destroy
Judyth's life through attacks on her on aaj, and by attempting to elicit
details of her whearabouts. That is certainly at another level from
someone writing a book that you don't like.
Anthony Marsh
Again, you misrepresent. I never said anything about Judyth lying about
the letter.
> someone told you to go find, and you still wont admit you were given
No one TOLD ME to go find the letter.
> the idea to get the letter. You still think Judyth didnt have Oswald
> saying she should go to Cancun and stay in a fine hotel. Just admit
Yes, she claims that Oswald said he'd meet her in Cancun and they'd stay
in a fine hotel. But she does not have him saying that they'll stat in a
fine hotel in Cancun.
> the simple facts frist Marsh, then people will take you seriously.
>
Just stop misrepresenting.
>
>
> P.S. Everyone is still waiting for you to attack fellow Team Judyth
> members for their misrepresentations, when can we expect that?
>
There is no Team Judyth. Only in your imagination.
Dave Reitzes
wrote:
> Not what a friend of hers told me.
>
> Martin
What could be more persuasive than unsourced hearsay from the guy who
cites imaginary documents at this newsgroup on a regular basis, gave us
the sinister web of conspiracy surrounding Mary Ferrell, and endorses the
credibility of a guy who claims to have attended an actual alien autopsy?
> "Steve Thomas" <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote in message
> � Marina refuses to help you because she knows you are a Team Judyth
> member and she knows Judyth is a quack.
Dave
Steve Thomas
"Pamela McElwain-Brown" <pame...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:gbydndZPgo0jOj7V...@earthlink.com...
>>
>> "Pamela McElwain-Brown" <pame...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:QtqdnYiatMSjwD_V...@earthlink.com...
>>> for some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only
>>> Marina can verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on
>>> this group, where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two,
>>> who are in touch with Marina and refuse to help me.
>>
>> your part to contact Marina. She lives in Dallas....and last I knew
>> worked in a Army Surplus store. She does not live in a locked box....to
>> be opened only by CT's with a key.
>
> place of work anyhow. If it is true as Barb and Dave are implying that
> she knows I would like to talk with her and chooses not to talk with me,
> that is her choice.
>
> as a CT aren't all that bad.
>
> consider her statements a missing piece of the puzzle of the events in
> NOLA in the summer of 1963.
This is why Marina wont talk to you, you "consider her(Judyth's)
statments a missing piece of the puzzle." The problem Pam is that
Judyth's "statements" have proven to be bullshit time and again. Why would
Marina, who is seeking the truth, talk to someone who is so interested in
the obvious fantasies of a chronic liar? Marina gets hounded enough from
legitimate reporters and media, why waste her time on nonsense? Do you
think she is not aware of all the Team Judyth coverups,corrections,and
outright screwups that are never answered for? What will you say to her if
she asks about the Marry Ferrell doc? Will you provide her evidence that
Ferell didnt send it? What will you say when she asks why nobody who knew
Ferrie ever heard of or saw her? What will you say when she asks about the
contradiction in Judyth's diagram of his appartment which showed it as it
looked after remodeling in the 90's, and how it actually looked in 63?
What will you say when she asks why Judyth tried to insert heself in
Oswalds leafleting falsly? What will you say when she asks why Team Judyth
was going around saying that Adrian Alba saw Judyth and Oswald together
when it was a lie? What will you say when she asks why Judyth said that a
Russian class was created for her? What will you say when she asks about
the Cancun dialog and the ever changing excuses to explain it away? What
will you say about the green glass promotion that didnt happen in 63, but
years earlier? What will you say when she asks how Judyth could describe a
whole chain of events speciffically in one city where she was asked by CIA
guys to write a letter to Kennedy, when there was no President Kennedy,
and a year later when there WAS a President Kennedy she was in a totally
different city, doing totally different things, with totaly different
people? What will you say when she asks how Judyth was able to watch
Kennedy land in Dallas LIVE on TV in Florida? If she is reading Pam, nows
your chance to earn an interview by explaining how you can take all the
crap put out by Team Judyth seriously. If you could explain that, mabey
Marina would take you seriously.
>
> I do have to wonder if Marina is choosing on her own to remain silent
> about Judyth or she is being advised by others to do so. I do have to
> wonder whether if those who are perpetrating the slimy attacks against
> Judyth are doing so because they believe they are protecting Marina.
>
>> I bet she is contacted several times a year by journalist (such as Jaap)
>> concerning specific points of her life. It is only natural to ask if he
>> made the effort to contact her....since she was in fact with Oswald
>> during this 24 hr period.
>
> Jaap believes Judyth and LHO were involved. Does Marina want to discuss
> this with anyone, much less someone who believes Judyth in this regard?
>>
>>>
>>> Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just
>>> ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to
>>> begin with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>>
>> However Jaap is not Baker....he is by his own claim a journalist...with
>> important inside information that needs to be confirmed. Marina was the
>> only known person with a intimate relationship with Oswald during this
>> period.....in order to do a proffessional article or whatever he needs to
>> contact Marina......it's basic journalism 101.
>
> You are an optimist, and I hope that you are right. But this is also
> Ongoing Cover-up 101, and even if Marina were to want to speak up she may
> not.
>
> Pamela McElwain-Brown
> www.in-broad-daylight.com
>
>
Anthony Marsh
> "Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holt...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
> news:68f7d6aa-ed80-4b22...@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
>> Dear Jim:
>>
>> I am not interested in an interview with Marina Porter.
>
> That inciates that you are not interested in learning the truth concerning
> this time period. She was there.
>
But she doesn't know anything about Judyth.
Anthony Marsh
> On Aug 14, 11:55�am, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>> More ridiculous statements about her book.
>> She wrote it; she went through every chapter making corrections before
>> publication.
>
>
> Could you kindly explain the part about her writing a letter to the
> Kennedy White House in May 1960?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
Yes, she was confused and misremembered when and why she wrote it.
William Yates
Ask Pamela.
Dave Reitzes
> On Aug 14, 10:38 am, Dave Reitzes <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 13, 11:19 pm, "jfk2...@gmail.com" <jfk2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 13, 10:10 am, Dave Reitzes <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 13, 12:47 am, Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > On 13 Aug 2008 00:29:52 -0400, "Pamela McElwain-Brown"
>
> > > > > <pamel...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > > > > >This is becoming hilarious. I have been attempting to contact Marina for
> > > > > >some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only Marina can
> > > > > >verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on this group,
> > > > > >where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two, who are in touch
> > > > > >with Marina and refuse to help me.
>
> > > > > Has it occurred to you that no one has put you in contact with Marina
> > > > > because Marina does not want to talk to you?
>
> > > Why then would Marina want to talk to Jaap?
>
> > Who says Marina wants to talk with Jaap?
>
> Nobody. �jko suggested Jaap call her. �Try to keep up.
Touchy, touchy. \:^)
> > > > I think a more pertinent question might be, why would anyone at this
> > > > forum want to help the person who authored the following message?
>
> > > I have made it plain on aaj that because of the ongoing flaming I don't
> > > consider it a worthwhile venue for research.
>
> > Yet you beg for our help.
>
> What is that supposed to mean?
It refers to your previous post complaining that no one at this forum
will help you.
Try to keep up. \:^)
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f69e8971bb86...
>
> > > > <QUOTE ON>------------------------------------------------
>
> > > > From: jfk279x <jfk2...@gmail.com>
> > > > Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
> > > > Subject: Re: JUDYTH: MEDEC-ZOA
> > > > Date: 5 Jul 2008 01:05:09 -0400
>
> > > > Gossip is interfering with Dave's ability to comprehend.
>
> > > > I do not post research on aaj.
>
> > > > <QUOTE OFF>-----------------------------------------------
>
> > > > > >Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just
> > > > > >ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to begin
> > > > > >with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>
> > > > > >Pamela McElwain-Brown
> > > > > >www.in-broad-daylight.com
>
> > > > Pamela doesn't post research on aaj, but she frequently attacks people
> > > > who do.
>
> > > The distortions need to be addressed.
>
> > What distortions?
>
> Start with the flaming headers you are currently writing about Martin
> and Howard. �
Okay, start.
What distortions?
Add to that all of the WCR apologist diatribes.
> Pure propaganda that you claim to be 'truth' and 'evidence'.
I don't see you addressing any distortions, Pamela. You just rant.
You do know the difference, don't you?
Dave
Dave Reitzes
> On Aug 14, 10:51 am, Steve Thomas <misledrks...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 14, 10:19 am, "jfk2...@gmail.com" <jfk2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 13, 10:10 am, Dave Reitzes <dreit...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 13, 12:47 am, Barb Junkkarinen <barbREMOVE...@comcast.net>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > On 13 Aug 2008 00:29:52 -0400, "Pamela McElwain-Brown"
>
> > > > > <pamel...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > > > > >This is becoming hilarious. I have been attempting to contact Marina for
> > > > > >some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only Marina can
> > > > > >verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on this group,
> > > > > >where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two, who are in touch
> > > > > >with Marina and refuse to help me.
>
> > > > > Has it occurred to you that no one has put you in contact with Marina
> > > > > because Marina does not want to talk to you?
>
> > > Why then would Marina want to talk to Jaap?
>
>
> You've missed the point. �jko blithely suggested that Jaap talk to
> Marina.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > > forum want to help the person who authored the following message?
>
> > > I have made it plain on aaj that because of the ongoing flaming I don't
> > > consider it a worthwhile venue for research.
>
>
> > > > <QUOTE ON>------------------------------------------------
>
> > > > From: jfk279x <jfk2...@gmail.com>
> > > > Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
> > > > Subject: Re: JUDYTH: MEDEC-ZOA
> > > > Date: 5 Jul 2008 01:05:09 -0400
>
> > > > Gossip is interfering with Dave's ability to comprehend.
>
> > > > I do not post research on aaj.
>
> > > > <QUOTE OFF>-----------------------------------------------
>
> > > > > >Now you ask Jaap if he has contacted Marina, as though anyone can just
> > > > > >ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to begin
> > > > > >with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>
> > > > > >Pamela McElwain-Brown
> > > > > >www.in-broad-daylight.com
>
> > > > Pamela doesn't post research on aaj, but she frequently attacks people
> > > > who do.
>
> > > The distortions need to be addressed.
>
> > the distortions and misrepresentations regarding Judyth's 700+ page
> > work of fiction that was offered to the public as history? Who can we
> > hold accountable, and who will addresss this attempted bamboozelment
> > by Team Judyth members of the JFK research community?
>
> Judyth's book is her witness statement and her product.
>
> Who of your imaginary "Team Judyth" is demanding that you burn the WCR and
> place Judyth's book on your mantel in posts 24-7? Nobody. �You are
> perfectly free to ignore her book or read it as you like.
>
> You and others here though, spearheaded by Barb,
You have frequently claimed that criticism of Judyth is led by David
Lifton. Which is it?
have attempted to destroy
> Judyth's life through attacks on her on aaj, and by attempting to elicit
> details of her whearabouts. �That is certainly at another level from
> someone writing a book that you don't like.
Steve Thomas has "attempted to destroy Judyth's life"?
You have evidence of this, right?
Dave
Steve Thomas
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:cI6dnUFP1pl8RznV...@comcast.com...
you gave hell to anyone who said she lied about it Marsh, again YOU
misrepresent. You have now been corrected go stand in the corner
>
>> someone told you to go find, and you still wont admit you were given
>
> No one TOLD ME to go find the letter.
more misrepresentations from Tony Marsh.
>
>> the idea to get the letter. You still think Judyth didnt have Oswald
>> saying she should go to Cancun and stay in a fine hotel. Just admit
>
> Yes, she claims that Oswald said he'd meet her in Cancun and they'd stay
> in a fine hotel. But she does not have him saying that they'll stat in a
> fine hotel in Cancun.
Whats the quote Marsh?
>
>> the simple facts frist Marsh, then people will take you seriously.
>>
>
> Just stop misrepresenting.
neve have, you do every post.
>
>>
>>
>> P.S. Everyone is still waiting for you to attack fellow Team Judyth
>> members for their misrepresentations, when can we expect that?
>>
>
> There is no Team Judyth. Only in your imagination.
>
P.S. everyone is waiting for you to attack fellow Judyth Defenders for
their misrepresentations, when can we expect that?
>>
>>
>>
>>
Pamela McElwain-Brown
> James K. Olmstead wrote:
>> "Pamela McElwain-Brown" <pame...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:gbydndZPgo0jOj7V...@earthlink.com...
>>>> "Pamela McElwain-Brown" <pame...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:QtqdnYiatMSjwD_V...@earthlink.com...
>>>>> for some time because of information Judyth has that I believe only
>>>>> Marina can verify or disprove, and have been laughed at and ignored on
>>>>> this group, where there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two,
>>>>> who are in touch with Marina and refuse to help me.
>>>> on your part to contact Marina. She lives in Dallas....and last I knew
>>>> worked in a Army Surplus store. She does not live in a locked
>>>> box....to be opened only by CT's with a key.
>>> I don't live in Dallas and would not want to pounce on her unawares at
>>> her place of work anyhow. If it is true as Barb and Dave are implying
>>> that she knows I would like to talk with her and chooses not to talk
>>> with me, that is her choice.
>>
>> even
>> though I'm disabled.
>>
>
> Yeah, maybe if you have a lot of money and are on the government approved
> travel list.
>
>> Barb's or Dave opinion are one thing....but if I really had to talk to
>> Marina
>> I'd find the means to do so regardless of "implied opinions".
>>
>
> And exactly what do you want to demand that Marina say? You want to try to
> force her to call Judyth a liar?
>
>>> killed in front of me on tv and have invested a good part of the last 20
>>> years, not to mention tens of thousands of dollars, doing everything I
>>> can to demonstrate his innocence and changing the focus of the crime
>>> scene in the public eye from the TSBD to the Presidential Limousine, so
>>> my credentials as a CT aren't all that bad.
>>
>> just change
>> the "focus" of the various elements of the crime scene because you feel
>> that
>> one element is more important then another, researchers will select key
>> areas but
>> you can't forget about the importance of other topics. As to Oswald's
>> "innocence"
>> he was "involved" so you can't demonstrate any innocence on his part.
>>
>> As to your CT credentials.....I didn't know you were required to have any
>> in order
>> to investigate a major historical event.
>>
>>> consider her statements a missing piece of the puzzle of the events in
>>> NOLA in the summer of 1963.
>>
>> validate
>> her story and have failed to do so. If her statements are not backed up
>> by
>> the
>> puzzle".......they are statements she has express but has failed to
>> support.
>>
>>> about Judyth or she is being advised by others to do so.
>>
>>
>>
>> I do have to wonder
>>> whether if those who are perpetrating the slimy attacks against Judyth
>>> are doing so because they believe they are protecting Marina.
>>
>> in
>> contact with Marina.....I know Ray calls her and yet I don't believe he
>> has
>> ever posted anything about Baker.
>>
>>
>>>> Jaap) concerning specific points of her life. It is only natural to
>>>> ask if he made the effort to contact her....since she was in fact with
>>>> Oswald during this 24 hr period.
>>> Jaap believes Judyth and LHO were involved. Does Marina want to discuss
>>> this with anyone, much less someone who believes Judyth in this regard?
>>
>> specific point
>> of time (24 hour period in Amsterdam) Jaap needs to make the effort to
>> contact her since she was in fact there.
>>
>>
>>>>> ring her up, about information which you don't believe Judyth has to
>>>>> begin with because according to you she's making the whole thing up.
>>>> important inside information that needs to be confirmed. Marina was
>>>> the only known person with a intimate relationship with Oswald during
>>>> this period.....in order to do a proffessional article or whatever he
>>>> needs to contact Marina......it's basic journalism 101.
>>> You are an optimist, and I hope that you are right. But this is also
>>> Ongoing Cover-up 101, and even if Marina were to want to speak up she
>>> may not.
>>
>> any past
>> thread or post...chances are he hasn't.....but without making the effort
>> few will
>> accept his "opinion" on this issue.
>>
>
> If Marina did not even know about Judyth at the time, what could she
> possibly contribute?
> >>>> for some time because of information Judyth
> >>>> has that I believe only Marina can verify or disprove, and have been
> >>>> laughed at and ignored on this group, where
> >>>> there are at least lurkers, if not a poster or two, who are in touch
> >>>> with Marina and refuse to help me.
> >>> on your part to contact Marina. She lives in
> >>> Dallas....and last I knew worked in a Army Surplus store. She does
> >>> not live in a locked box....to be opened only by
> >>> CT's with a key.
> >> I don't live in Dallas and would not want to pounce on her unawares at
> >> her place of work anyhow. If it is true as
> >> Barb and Dave are implying that she knows I would like to talk with her
> >> and chooses not to talk with me, that is her
> >> choice.
>
> > even
> > though I'm disabled.
>
> Yeah, maybe if you have a lot of money and are on the government
> approved travel list.
>
> > Barb's or Dave opinion are one thing....but if I really had to talk to
> > Marina
> > I'd find the means to do so regardless of "implied opinions".
>
> And exactly what do you want to demand that Marina say? You want to try
> to force her to call Judyth a liar?
>
>
>
> >> killed in front of me on tv and have invested a
> >> good part of the last 20 years, not to mention tens of thousands of
> >> dollars, doing everything I can to demonstrate his
> >> innocence and changing the focus of the crime scene in the public eye
> >> from the TSBD to the Presidential Limousine, so
> >> my credentials as a CT aren't all that bad.
>
> > just change
> > the "focus" of the various elements of the crime scene because you feel
> > that
> > one element is more important then another, researchers will select key
> > areas but
> > you can't forget about the importance of other topics. As to Oswald's
> > "innocence"
> > he was "involved" so you can't demonstrate any innocence on his part.
>
> > As to your CT credentials.....I didn't know you were required to have
> > any in order
> > to investigate a major historical event.
>
> >> consider her statements a missing piece of the
> >> puzzle of the events in NOLA in the summer of 1963.
>
> > validate
> > her story and have failed to do so. If her statements are not backed up
> > by
> > the
> > puzzle".......they are statements she has express but has failed to
> > support.
>
> >> about Judyth or she is being advised by others
> >> to do so.
>
>
> > I do have to wonder
> >> whether if those who are perpetrating the slimy attacks against Judyth
> >> are doing so because they believe they are
> >> protecting Marina.
>
> > are in
> > contact with Marina.....I know Ray calls her and yet I don't believe he
> > has
> > ever posted anything about Baker.
>
> >>> Jaap) concerning specific points of her life. It
> >>> is only natural to ask if he made the effort to contact her....since
> >>> she was in fact with Oswald during this 24 hr
> >>> period.
> >> Jaap believes Judyth and LHO were involved. Does Marina want to
> >> discuss this with anyone, much less someone who
> >> believes Judyth in this regard?
>
> > specific point
> > of time (24 hour period in Amsterdam) Jaap needs to make the effort to
> > contact her since she was in fact there.
>
> >>>> just ring her up, about information which you
> >>>> don't believe Judyth has to begin with because according to you she's
> >>>> making the whole thing up.
> >>> journalist...with important inside information that needs to be
> >>> confirmed. Marina was the only known person with a intimate
> >>> relationship with Oswald during this period.....in order
> >>> to do a proffessional article or whatever he needs to contact
> >>> Marina......it's basic journalism 101.
> >> You are an optimist, and I hope that you are right. But this is also
> >> Ongoing Cover-up 101, and even if Marina were to
> >> want to speak up she may not.
>
> > any past
> > thread or post...chances are he hasn't.....but without making the effort
> > few will
> > accept his "opinion" on this issue.
>
> If Marina did not even know about Judyth at the time, what could she
> possibly contribute?
>
subject of Judyth for such a long time.
Her initial impressions of learning about the possibility that LHO was
involved with Judyth would have been the most insightful, I think. With a
woman's intuition, she might have been able to make connections to things
that hadn't made sense before, such as where Lee might have been when he was
not with her, why he lied to her about being fired from Reily for over a
week, etc. Or, her gut reaction might have been the opposite. With the
passing of time, recollections may have become more complex.
In any case, she is put into a difficult situation whether she thinks Judyth
might have been involved with LHO or not. What good does it do for a wife
to try to deny a claimed affair in the first place? Especially when your
dirty laundry has already been aired and the public is painfully aware of
the terrible state of your marriage, plus the fact that she was pregnant at
the time?
Pamela McElwain-Brown
www.in-broad-daylight.com
William Yates
Product of her imagination.
>
> Who of your imaginary "Team Judyth" is demanding that you burn the WCR and
> place Judyth's book on your mantel in posts 24-7? Nobody. You are
> perfectly free to ignore her book or read it as you like.
>
> You and others here though, spearheaded by Barb, have attempted to destroy
> Judyth's life through attacks on her on aaj,
Some of Judyth's claims have been shown to be erroneous and others
unsubstantiated. It's not Barb's fault that Judyth prefered using her
imagination to a painful insistence on being honest.
> and by attempting to elicit
> details of her whearabouts.
Again, only Jaap is trying to find her, and he has a legitimate reason
to do so. But if it's wrong to try to contact Judyth, why is it ok for
you to want to try to contact Marina?
Feel free to let us know what you think of Martin and Tony posting her
Social Security number, though.
William Yates
> Dave Reitzes wrote:
>> On Aug 14, 11:55�am, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
>> wrote:
>>> More ridiculous statements about her book.
>>> She wrote it; she went through every chapter making corrections before
>>> publication.
>>
>>
>> Could you kindly explain the part about her writing a letter to the
>> Kennedy White House in May 1960?
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>
> Yes, she was confused and misremembered when and why she wrote it.
Upload you docs that prove she was confused and misremembered it.
Anthony Marsh
> On Aug 14, 12:22�pm, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>> Not what a friend of hers told me.
>>
>> Martin
>
>
> What could be more persuasive than unsourced hearsay from the guy who
> cites imaginary documents at this newsgroup on a regular basis, gave us
> the sinister web of conspiracy surrounding Mary Ferrell, and endorses the
> credibility of a guy who claims to have attended an actual alien autopsy?
>
No one endorses the credibility of a guy who claims to have attended an
actual alien autopsy. That's just another of your false charges which
you think will be guilt by association. Poisoning the Well.
jfk...@gmail.com
wrote:
> Anthony Marsh wrote:
> > William Yates wrote:
> >> Pamela McElwain-Brown wrote:
> >>>news:48a1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
> >>>> "Jaap Holtzapffel" <j.holtzapf...@hetnet.nl> wrote in message
I don't know if Marina knows anything about Judyth or not. Marina is a
witness to LHO in NOLA in the summer of 1963, and certainly has
information about her experiences and impressions at that time.
James K. Olmstead
Since when do you have to be on a "approved travel list" to go to Dallas?
>
>> Barb's or Dave opinion are one thing....but if I really had to talk to Marina
>> I'd find the means to do so regardless of "implied opinions".
>>
>
> And exactly what do you want to demand that Marina say? You want to try to force her to call Judyth a liar?
Pay attention....the point is that Marina was with Oswald at the time, she
has first hand knowledge of what happened in Amsterdam.
It's not about Baker at this point, it's about the 24hr period in
Amsterdam which Jaap feels is important information.
jko