Where is the documentation, Judyth and Martin? (#3)
Dave Reitzes
Science Fair trip to Indianapolis in May of 1960."
<QUOTE ON>---------------------------
After I signed a loyalty oath -- as well as a couple of papers about
promising to always be loyal to my country in my scientific endeavors
-- in what seemed to be a recording studio or soundproof room at Eli
Lilly, I was asked to write to President John F. Kennedy, offering my
services to my country.[30] (Judyth Baker, LEE HARVEY OSWALD, p. 5.)
<QUOTE OFF>--------------------------
>From endnote 30:
<QUOTE ON>---------------------------
The letter was written to Kennedy in May, 1960. JFK's personal
assistant with expertise in Latin American affairs, Ralph Dungan,
immediately wrote a reply, which is in my possession.
<QUOTE OFF>--------------------------
-----
Two quotes from Martin Shackelford:
"Judyth Baker's book . . . has just been published. . . . Now Ms.
Baker's documentation is fully available for those who have been
interested in seeing it." (Martin Shackelford, alt.conspiracy.jfk post,
June 8, 2006.)
"The book is essentially what she told me in 1999, just in a bit more
detail, with all of the documentation included." (Martin Shackelford,
alt.assassination.jfk post, July 27, 2006.)
-----
Judyth and Martin: I would love to read more about Judyth's
communication with President John F. Kennedy in May of 1960.
Page number, please.
Dave
jwrush
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1155682803.4...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> In her book Judyth describes an incident that occurred "after I won the
> Science Fair trip to Indianapolis in May of 1960."
>
>
> <QUOTE ON>---------------------------
>
> After I signed a loyalty oath -- as well as a couple of papers about
> promising to always be loyal to my country in my scientific endeavors
> -- in what seemed to be a recording studio or soundproof room at Eli
> Lilly, I was asked to write to President John F. Kennedy, offering my
> services to my country.[30] (Judyth Baker, LEE HARVEY OSWALD, p. 5.)
>
> <QUOTE OFF>--------------------------
>
>
>>From endnote 30:
>
>
> <QUOTE ON>---------------------------
>
> The letter was written to Kennedy in May, 1960. JFK's personal
> assistant with expertise in Latin American affairs, Ralph Dungan,
> immediately wrote a reply, which is in my possession.
>
> <QUOTE OFF>--------------------------
=======
Uhh, Kennedy wasn't elected until November of 1960, and he didn't take
office until Jan. of 1961.
If she wrote a letter to the President in May of 1960, that would have
been Eisenhower.
Barb Junkkarinen
OUCH!
Can't wait for the explanation for this one. Oh, Judyth?
Barb :-)
>
>
tims...@gmail.com
Hi All,
LOL! Another Judyth howler! In fact, Kennedy didn't even win the
Democratic nomination for President until July of 1960. How bad is this
stuff??
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
"Newsgroup Commentator"
James K. Olmstead
James K. Olmstead
JLeyd...@aol.com
There will be no explanation for obvious reasons.
JGL
Barb Junkkarinen
<jolm...@neo.rr.com> wrote:
>Great catch
>
>jko
And one for which there is NO plausible explanation .... no matter how
many concussions, muggings, moves, floods, pestulence, etc.
The devil is in the details ... this was a simple one. With deadly
sharp points.
Barb :-)
William Yates
"jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote:
Someone seems to be having problems with presidential chronology.
"13.The CIA was created with significant inspiration from OSS founder
"Wild Bill" Donovan a little more than a decade earlier, in Sept. 1947,
when Eisenhower signed the National Security Act."
Page 646
Barb Junkkarinen
<william_...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Yikes ... another one.
Barb :-)
jwrush
"William Yates" <william_...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:william_yates515-10...@news.west.earthlink.net...
Maybe Judyth was drunk when she wrote the book. She looks like an
alcoholic to me. And I suspect some of her advisors were stoned.
Martin Shackelford
The letter from Ralph Dungan is dated May 21, 1961.
Martin
Martin Shackelford
seem to be zig-zagging to avoid--a simple typo.
I have the Dungan letter. It was dated May 21, 1961.
So much for silliness about "deadly sharp points." Dull thinking is more
like it.
Martin
Martin Shackelford
literature? You folks want to have it both ways.
Martin
Martin Shackelford
Judyth is a teetotaler.
Martin
Martin Shackelford
Martin
jpsh...@my-deja.com
Martin Shackelford wrote:
> Not only a plausible explanation, but an obvious one--but one you folks
> seem to be zig-zagging to avoid--a simple typo.
> I have the Dungan letter. It was dated May 21, 1961.
> So much for silliness about "deadly sharp points." Dull thinking is more
> like it.
It's more than a typo. How can a letter dated 1961
be an "immediate" reply to a letter written at the
National Science Fair in Indianapolis in 1960?
Did Baker wait a year to mail it?
jpsh...@my-deja.com
Martin Shackelford wrote:
> Wrong again, Leyden. Already posted.
You didn't explain the connection of the 1961 letter
to the 1960 National Science Fair.
Dave Reitzes
Martin Shackelford wrote:
> Not only a plausible explanation, but an obvious one--but one you folks
> seem to be zig-zagging to avoid--a simple typo.
> I have the Dungan letter. It was dated May 21, 1961.
Please post the letter.
Dave
Dave Reitzes
jpsh...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Martin Shackelford wrote:
> > Wrong again, Leyden. Already posted.
>
> You didn't explain the connection of the 1961 letter
> to the 1960 National Science Fair.
I'm sure the letter will explain the whole thing.
As soon as Martin posts it, this can all put to rest.
Dave
JLeyd...@aol.com
Martin Shackelford wrote:
> Wrong again, Leyden. Already posted.
>
> Martin
Let's see, Judyth can't keep the dates of the JFK presidency straight
but she remembers 12-13 phone conversation with Oswald verbatim 35
years after the fact ("You'll go to [non-existent] Cancun. You'll stay
in a fine hotel. I'll be there...") Does make a guy wonder.
JGL
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
Post it? You mean Martin was wrong when he said all documentation was
in the book? Say it isn't so. :-)
Barb :-)
>
Barb Junkkarinen
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>Not only a plausible explanation, but an obvious one--but one you folks
>seem to be zig-zagging to avoid--a simple typo.
What simple typo? Are you saying she was at the Indianapolis National
Science Fair in 1961 .... NOT in 1960 as she has widely written?
>
>I have the Dungan letter. It was dated May 21, 1961.
Then it would seem she wrote to him or someone in 1961. But she was at
the Indianapolis science fair where she was whisked away to sign
loayalty oaths and requesteed to write President Kennedy in 1960.
Well, according to Judyth ... consistently.
When was she at that Indianapolis science fair, Martin?
>So much for silliness about "deadly sharp points." Dull thinking is more
>like it.
Just keep your eyes closed and pretend the wind stinging your cheeks
is not from a plummet down a slippery slope. Of your own making.
Now ... Indianapolis .... 1960 as always touted .... or has that
always been a "simple typo"?
This one should be simple to clear up quite straightforwardly. :-)
Barb :-)
Pamela McElwain-Brown
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>Not only a plausible explanation, but an obvious one--but one you folks
>seem to be zig-zagging to avoid--a simple typo.
>I have the Dungan letter. It was dated May 21, 1961.
>So much for silliness about "deadly sharp points." Dull thinking is more
>like it.
>
>Martin
>
Martin,
With all due respect, you seem to be calling this mistake a typo when
in reality it is a non sequiteur to what Judyth is saying. She makes
the statement about writing to JFK in the same paragraph in which she
talks about signing loyalty oaths at the Science Fair. She is
implying a connection between the two and the fact that these things
would help her get more money and supplies.
Why is Judyth trying to make a connection between these things in the
first place?
Pamela
Dixie M Dea
Aug 17, 2006, 12:38pm From: barbRE...@comcast.net
(Barb Junkkarinen)
Barb...
I don't know that Martin was wrong, but could be she actually has no
more documentation then what is in the book. That is only a thought
though! However, in quite a few places she does mention she has such and
such document in her possession! Why she didn't include these is beyond
my comprehension though. Some places she says that she gave only trusted
JFK researchers the info. The reason why, also puzzles me. Although
obviously some of us critics are not among these trusted few....lol
___________
Dixie
Dave Reitzes
"All" documentation? That must have been a typo on Martin's part.
Besides, if that were true, what reason would anyone have to purchase
"LEE HARVEY OSWALD, AN AMERICAN HERO, the second volume in this
series"? (Judyth's unbelievably crazy book, p. 662, fn. 258.)
How many volumes do you think there will be in all, Barb? At fifty
bucks a pop, of course.
Dave
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
Teue ... and abominable. This is supposed to be the long awaited book
that we were told would answer all the questions ... and contain all
the proof. Even when the book came out, Martin directly stated that
all the documentation was in the book. We obviously have learned
otherwise...
Barb :-)
>
>
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
Well, how many Freddie movies did they make? How many terminator
movies? Etc, etc, etc. At least those were billed as fiction.
Barb :-)
>
Dave Reitzes
Pamela McElwain-Brown wrote:
> On 17 Aug 2006 02:49:27 -0400, Martin Shackelford
> <msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> >Not only a plausible explanation, but an obvious one--but one you folks
> >seem to be zig-zagging to avoid--a simple typo.
> >I have the Dungan letter. It was dated May 21, 1961.
> >So much for silliness about "deadly sharp points." Dull thinking is more
> >like it.
> >
> >Martin
> >
> Martin,
> With all due respect, you seem to be calling this mistake a typo when
> in reality it is a non sequiteur to what Judyth is saying. She makes
> the statement about writing to JFK in the same paragraph in which she
> talks about signing loyalty oaths at the Science Fair.
In the same sentence, actually. \:^)
<QUOTE ON>---------------------------
After I signed a loyalty oath -- as well as a couple of papers about
promising to always be loyal to my country in my scientific endeavors
-- in what seemed to be a recording studio or soundproof room at Eli
Lilly, I was asked to write to President John F. Kennedy, offering my
services to my country.[30] (Judyth Baker, LEE HARVEY OSWALD, p. 5.)
<QUOTE OFF>--------------------------
She is
> implying a connection between the two and the fact that these things
> would help her get more money and supplies.
>
> Why is Judyth trying to make a connection between these things in the
> first place?
>
> Pamela
Good question. (Say, you don't think she deliberately withheld the
alleged letter from her book because of the date conflict -- er, I
mean, "typo" -- do you?)
Incidentally, about those CIA conscription papers/loyalty
oaths/whatever Judyth's calling them today: I asked Martin some time
back if he was attempting to obtain copies of these important
documents. Strangely, he was not, and indicated no interest in doing
so. See:
Dave
Anthony Marsh
Ah, but this isn't the official book. It is the unofficial book. Seems
you'll have to keep waiting a few more years.
jwrush
"Barb Junkkarinen" <barbRE...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:vum9e2p3eqsa0i2va...@4ax.com...
> On 17 Aug 2006 02:49:27 -0400, Martin Shackelford
> <msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
>>Not only a plausible explanation, but an obvious one--but one you folks
>>seem to be zig-zagging to avoid--a simple typo.
>
> What simple typo? Are you saying she was at the Indianapolis National
> Science Fair in 1961 .... NOT in 1960 as she has widely written?
>
>>
>>I have the Dungan letter. It was dated May 21, 1961.
>
> Then it would seem she wrote to him or someone in 1961. But she was at
> the Indianapolis science fair where she was whisked away to sign
> loayalty oaths and requesteed to write President Kennedy in 1960.
> Well, according to Judyth ... consistently.
>
> When was she at that Indianapolis science fair, Martin?
Barb, the national fair apparently switched cities every year. It was in
Indianapolis in 1960:
http://www.botany.utexas.edu/facstaff/facpages/mbrown/Mbrownhome/elaine/called/sciencef.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
I know. :-) I also know Judyth attended the 11th annual one because
of a picture in her book .... this science fair was born in 1950 (and
is still administered by the same outfit, though Intel has been the
major sponsor for the last several years) ..... started in 1950 makes
1960 the 11th annual fair.
So her whole whisked off to sign loyalty oaths AND directed to write
to President Kennedy scenario .... well, it reeks ... and it's
impossible.
Prepare for a sudden memory that the letter part of the episode
happened the next year somewhere else ,... at a different whisking
away perhaps ...
Barb :-)
>
>
Martin Shackelford
There is no mention of the Science Fair on p. 5 nor in Note 30. I have
no idea where the idea came from that it was written at the time of the
Science Fair. It wasn't.
Another artificial link made by the hyenas looking for attack points.
Martin
Martin Shackelford
Martin
Martin Shackelford
Please don't feign incomprehension.
Martin
Martin Shackelford
that were posted again--no mention of the Science Fair. No connection to
the Science Fair. None.
Martin Shackelford
The Science SEMINAR, which is what you are talking about without
apparently having read the book carefully, was in 1961.
Martin Shackelford
Martin
Barb Junkkarinen
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>There is no connection, J.B.
>There is no mention of the Science Fair on p. 5 nor in Note 30. I have
>no idea where the idea came from that it was written at the time of the
>Science Fair. It wasn't.
>Another artificial link made by the hyenas looking for attack points.
>
>Martin
I thought you said you'd read the book...*twice*.
Pg 4 - 5, in the "The Indianapolis Connection" section....
The context is she is at the fair in Indianapolis. She lays out a
preposterous seting in which she and some otrher whiz kids (all male
except her) were taken for what seems to have been a photo op at a
morgue .... where photographers popped flashbulbs in her eyes as she
wielded a scalpel and cut into a cadvaer. She says she went for the
trigeminal nerve. This is ludicrous on so many levels one would wonder
where to even begin ... or why to bother. (And hey, where are these
photos of a group of science fair teens around a cadaver with one of
them given a sclpel and allowed to actually cut into the body?)
At any rate, she goes on to say that he obvious surgical experience
(gag me) gained even more attention to her and she continues:
"I found myself whisked away from the university medical center to
meet a few military officers and more scientists, finally ending up in
a pharmaceutical research area at Eli Lilly. Neither Mr. Scharer (my
chemistry instructor) nor my mother had any idea where I had gone: I
was not even present to speak to judges about my project (which
somehow won a fourth prize even though I wasn't there to talk about
it.). But I didn't care ......
[..................]
After I signed a loyalty oath - as well as a couple of papers about
promising to always be loyal to my country in my scientific endeavors
- in what seemed to be a recording studio or soundproof room at Eli
Lilly. I WAS ASKED TO WRITE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY, OFFERING MY
SERVICES TO MY COUNTRY. I was not aware until later that one or more
of the people I was talking to represented the CIA. But I was told
that after I did these tings, I would get more equipment and support.
And I did. I was also asked to write to the US Army's Walter Reed Army
Institute of Research to get additional materials and guidance."
That letter to Walter Reed was dated September 1960.
She was at the science fair in May 1960.
She says after being whisked away to sign loyalty oaths .... remember
it's May 1960 ... she was ALSO "ASKED TO WRITE TO PRESIDENT JOHN F.
KENNEDY..."
Is the problem becoming clear, Martin?
In May 1960, John Kennedy was not the president ... heck, May was
pre-convention, he wasn't even the party's nominee yet!
You're hung up on the Dangan letter. That letter doesn't matter here.
If she has a letter from Dangan from 1961, then she no doubt wrote
some letter to JFK in 1961. Whoopee.
The salient point here is that she lays out a scenario in
Indinanpolis in May 1960 ... that is flat out UNcredible on its face
... because Kennedy was not yet president.
Got the prob now?
Don't think it can be made any plainer to you than that.
Barb
Barb Junkkarinen
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>She has no problem keeping the dates straight. It was a typo.
>Please don't feign incomprehension.
I can only hope you are feigning incomprehension for it has been made
flat out plain in several posts that the problem here is Judyth saying
she was whisked away to sign loyalty oaths and directed to write to
PRESIDENT JFK WHLE AT THE FAIR IN INDIANA IN MAY 1960.
JFK wasn't president in May 1960, Martin. He wasn't even the official
party nominee in May 1960.
Now what?
Barb
Barb Junkkarinen
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>Both letters were written in 1961, as should be obvious.
>
>Martin
Then adress Judyth's scenario described in detail on pgs 4 - 5 of her
book describing being whisked away WHILE IN INDIANA IN MAY ***1960***
to sign loyalty oaths and being directed to write to ***President
Kennedy*** .
JFK wasn't president of anything in May of 1960.
Barb :-)
Barb Junkkarinen
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>The letter has NOTHING TO DO with the 1960 Science Fair. Read the quotes
>that were posted again--no mention of the Science Fair. No connection to
>the Science Fair. None.
She connects it, lays out the whole scenario on pgs 4 - 5 .... as I
have quoted in detail in another post.
Deal with it, Martin .... or have the hutspah to say, "Wow, that is a
problem" and step away from it.
She says she was whisked away to sign loyalty oaths AND directed to
write to ***President Kennedy*** WHILE at the Indiana fair in May
1960.
One doesn't have to have been a history major to know JFK was not the
president in May 1960.
Barb Junkkarinen
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>The Science FAIR was in 1960.
>The Science SEMINAR, which is what you are talking about without
>apparently having read the book carefully, was in 1961.
>
>Martin
Utter BS. Pgs 4 -5 are all about her doings at the science FAIR in
1960.
And if you are going to maintain otherwise, with any sort of straight
face, then I guess you'll need to explain the letter to Walter Reed
dated in 1960 ..... which she says she was ALSO asked to write at that
whisking away to sign loyalty oaths and being directed to write
President Kennedy ... while at the science FAIR in May 1960.
Barb
Barb Junkkarinen
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>The letter was written later, after the Science SEMINAR in 1961.
>
>Martin
Pamela has the book, Martin. She knows better. So do I. And others.
Her complete scenario pn pgs 4 - 5 is all about being at the science
FAIR in 1960.
Perhaps you could point out anywhere on those pages where she
references a science seminar in 1961.....which of course would be a
real hiccup in her chronology at that point.
And then explain why she starts the next section on pg5, immediately
following the loyalty oath/ writing to President Kennedy/ being told
to write to Walter Reed with these words ....
The section is titled "The Walter Reed Army Institue of Research" and
she begins ... again, right on the heels of her final sentences about
the science FAIR loyalty oath/writing to President Kennedy thing with
this:
"The summer months that followed were filled with hectic and dedicated
cancer research, relieved only by dates with my boyfriends. BY
SEPTEMBER, I FINALLY FELT READY TO CONTACT WALTER REED...."
And, in fact, as produced on pg 6 is the letter of response she
received from Walter Reed dated "2 September 1960."
On what pages exactly can we find reference to this SEMINAR in Indiana
you tout in 1961?
I see she says she "crashed" a writer's seminar in FLORIDA in the
Spring of 1961.
Then after graduation, it was off to Roswell in Buffalo.
So, when was this "science SEMINAR" in Indiana in 1961?
Barb
Peter Fokes
<barbRE...@comcast.net> wrote:
>On 18 Aug 2006 08:22:22 -0400, Martin Shackelford
><msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
>>The letter has NOTHING TO DO with the 1960 Science Fair. Read the quotes
>>that were posted again--no mention of the Science Fair. No connection to
>>the Science Fair. None.
>
>She connects it, lays out the whole scenario on pgs 4 - 5 .... as I
>have quoted in detail in another post.
>
>Deal with it, Martin .... or have the hutspah to say, "Wow, that is a
>problem" and step away from it.
>
>She says she was whisked away to sign loyalty oaths AND directed to
>write to ***President Kennedy*** WHILE at the Indiana fair in May
>1960.
>
>One doesn't have to have been a history major to know JFK was not the
>president in May 1960.
Mmmm ... I just cannot resist breaking my vow to stop responding to
this nonsense ...
IKE must have been surprised to get a letter addressed to President
Kennedy!
Maybe he forwarded it ..... with best wishes to Senator Kennedy!
>Barb :-)
>>
>>Martin
PF
jpsh...@my-deja.com
> There is no connection, J.B.
> There is no mention of the Science Fair on p. 5 nor in Note 30. I have
> no idea where the idea came from that it was written at the time of the
> Science Fair. It wasn't.
> Another artificial link made by the hyenas looking for attack points.
>
> Martin
I noticed that this post by Mr. Lupschen quotes 26 facts
about Baker which places the Dungan letter in 1961 but
says Baker's letter was written at the suggestion
of George Smathers, not Eli Lilly:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5b8814057f5b9453?dmode=source&hl=en
"Senator George Smathers, Governor LeRoy Collins, and others appreciate
not
only her cancer research, but her interest in fighting communism and
Castro.
She is asked to write President Kennedy and receives a reply from Ralph
Dungan, Kennedy´s longtime friend and Latin American-anti-Castro
advisor."
J.B.
Dave Reitzes
Aye. There's the rub.
Dave
Martin Shackelford
to see in a JFK book. Other documents are cited--that constitutes
"documentation," too, Barb, or are we to throw out every book that
doesn't INCLUDE every document it cites?
Martin
Pamela McElwain-Brown
Indianapolis Science Fair, does it?
Pamela
On 18 Aug 2006 08:24:36 -0400, Martin Shackelford
JLeyd...@aol.com
Martin Shackelford wrote:
> She has no problem keeping the dates straight. It was a typo.
> Please don't feign incomprehension.
>
> Martin
Well, how are we supposed to know, Shackelford? You told us years ago
that Judyth "exaggerates" and more recently noted that she has
"short-term memory" loss as a result of being rapped on the noggin a
couple of times too many. We're just trying to make sense of all this.
JGL
jpsh...@my-deja.com
Martin Shackelford wrote:
> There is no connection, J.B.
J.B.?
> There is no mention of the Science Fair on p. 5 nor in Note 30. I have
> no idea where the idea came from that it was written at the time of the
> Science Fair. It wasn't.
> Another artificial link made by the hyenas looking for attack points.
What about in the text that note 30 is supposed to support?
What is the context for note 30?
Barb Junkkarinen
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>There are more documents reproduced in her book than you are ever likely
>to see in a JFK book. Other documents are cited--that constitutes
>"documentation," too, Barb, or are we to throw out every book that
>doesn't INCLUDE every document it cites?
>
>Martin
<QUOTE ON>-----------------------------------------
From: Martin Shackelford
Date: Thurs, Jul 27 2006 11:18 am
Email: Martin Shackelford <msh...@concentric.net>
Groups: alt.assassination.jfk
The book is essentially what she told me in 1999, just in a bit more
detail, with all of the documentation included. The basic account
hasn't
changed at all.
I've pointed this out before, but it's not what you want to hear, so
you
turn a deaf ear to it, as usual.
Martin
<QUOTE OFF>----------------------------------------
Sidestep pap, Martin. You said it wasll all in the book ... just like
you had promised it would be for years.
People took you at your word.
Barb
Martin Shackelford
Please stop inventing things.
Clearly the chronology got a bit jumbled--either in the writing or in
the editing of that section of the book. Try to keep in mind that I
neither wrote nor edited the text.
There was the Science Fair; there was the letter to Walter Reed in
September 1960; and there was the letter to Kennedy in the Spring of
1961, to which Dungan replied on May 21.
Martin
Martin Shackelford
for sure at which stage of the process it crept in.
Martin
Barb Junkkarinen
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>Where did I say the science seminar was in Indiana--nowhere, Barb.
>Please stop inventing things.
>Clearly the chronology got a bit jumbled--either in the writing or in
>the editing of that section of the book. Try to keep in mind that I
>neither wrote nor edited the text.
>There was the Science Fair; there was the letter to Walter Reed in
>September 1960; and there was the letter to Kennedy in the Spring of
>1961, to which Dungan replied on May 21.
>
>Martin
Ah yes, last week when this arose this was one explanation scenario
noted as expected.
Now, finally, after al lot of gnashing of teeth about the
insignificant Dangan letter...here it is.
Chronology a bit jumbled, you say. She writes with a clear and very
detailed telling of what went down....several things and people and
locations all inter-connected. One would expect it would be quite a
memory ... she even noted her teacher and mother didn't even know
where she'd been taken. The loyalty oaths and direction to write the
letter was all one ball of wax.
To say chronology got jumbled at this point, when she clearly writes
that this all happened during the Indianapolis science fair ..... is
one more thing that just stretches credulity. Too far, in fact. Way to
far. The bunjee cord has long snapped.
So, this science "seminar" you say she attended in 1961, where all
this happened .... where was it, exactly? Please consider carefully
before laying it off to the writer's seminar she says she crashed in
Florida in the Spring of 1961 .... that just does not fit her overall
scenario about this whole thing at all.
Barb
Barb Junkkarinen
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>Nope. There was clearly some chronological confusion, and I don't know
>for sure at which stage of the process it crept in.
This wasn't a "crept" ... this is an entire scenario laid out in a
certain place and at a certain time with certain people around.
In my opinion, the clearest and most likely explanation is that, for
many people the fact that the President is not in office, at all, the
year he is elected is oft overlooked.
Barb
Anthony Marsh
> On 19 Aug 2006 12:00:45 -0400, Martin Shackelford
> <msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
>> Nope. There was clearly some chronological confusion, and I don't know
>> for sure at which stage of the process it crept in.
>
> This wasn't a "crept" ... this is an entire scenario laid out in a
> certain place and at a certain time with certain people around.
>
> In my opinion, the clearest and most likely explanation is that, for
> many people the fact that the President is not in office, at all, the
> year he is elected is oft overlooked.
>
Jeez, even President Kennedy understood and correctly explained the
phenomenon.
It is the year of election which ends in zero, not the date of the
death. And also remembers that it includes death by natural causes or
accident as well as assassination.
Dave Reitzes
Has Martin posted the letter yet, Barb? I haven't seen it.
Dave
Dave Reitzes
Barb Junkkarinen wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2006 08:24:36 -0400, Martin Shackelford
> <msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
> >The letter was written later, after the Science SEMINAR in 1961.
> >
> >Martin
>
> Pamela has the book, Martin. She knows better. So do I. And others.
>
> Her complete scenario pn pgs 4 - 5 is all about being at the science
> FAIR in 1960.
>
> Perhaps you could point out anywhere on those pages where she
> references a science seminar in 1961.....which of course would be a
> real hiccup in her chronology at that point.
Maybe that's part of the material Judyth's so upset at Martin for
leaving out.
Oh, and she DID complain that there were typos, too!
> And then explain why she starts the next section on pg5, immediately
> following the loyalty oath/ writing to President Kennedy/ being told
> to write to Walter Reed with these words ....
>
> The section is titled "The Walter Reed Army Institue of Research" and
> she begins ... again, right on the heels of her final sentences about
> the science FAIR loyalty oath/writing to President Kennedy thing with
> this:
>
> "The summer months that followed were filled with hectic and dedicated
> cancer research, relieved only by dates with my boyfriends. BY
> SEPTEMBER, I FINALLY FELT READY TO CONTACT WALTER REED...."
>
> And, in fact, as produced on pg 6 is the letter of response she
> received from Walter Reed dated "2 September 1960."
>
> On what pages exactly can we find reference to this SEMINAR in Indiana
> you tout in 1961?
>
> I see she says she "crashed" a writer's seminar in FLORIDA in the
> Spring of 1961.
>
> Then after graduation, it was off to Roswell in Buffalo.
>
> So, when was this "science SEMINAR" in Indiana in 1961?
>
> Barb
Perhaps the letter itself would help illuminate things.
Hard to say, as Martin doesn't seem to want anyone to see it.
Dave
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
>
Nope. And I doubt he will.
Barb :-)
Barb Junkkarinen
<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Barb Junkkarinen wrote:
>> On 19 Aug 2006 12:00:45 -0400, Martin Shackelford
>> <msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Nope. There was clearly some chronological confusion, and I don't know
>>> for sure at which stage of the process it crept in.
>>
>> This wasn't a "crept" ... this is an entire scenario laid out in a
>> certain place and at a certain time with certain people around.
>>
>> In my opinion, the clearest and most likely explanation is that, for
>> many people the fact that the President is not in office, at all, the
>> year he is elected is oft overlooked.
>>
>
>Jeez, even President Kennedy understood and correctly explained the
>phenomenon.
>
>It is the year of election which ends in zero, not the date of the
>death. And also remembers that it includes death by natural causes or
>accident as well as assassination.
What in all that is holy are you talking about, Anthony?
This discussion is about Judyth saying she was directed to write a
letter to "President Kennedy" in May of 1960.
Kennedy wasn't President of anything in May of 1960. He was elected in
Novemver 1960 .... not President til 1961. He wasn't dead of any
causes during either of those years.
Judyth screwed up.
Barb
Dave Reitzes
Martin Shackelford wrote:
> There are more documents reproduced in her book than you are ever likely
> to see in a JFK book.
How many of these documents concern JFK?
Other documents are cited--that constitutes
> "documentation," too, Barb, or are we to throw out every book that
> doesn't INCLUDE every document it cites?
>
> Martin
Yadda, yadda, yadda.
Just direct us to the proof that Judyth was involved in a plot to kill
Castro, Martin:
". . . I can prove every word i [sic] am writing here--- i [sic] can
assure you that what we were doing was trying to create a biological
weapon to get castro [sic] inn [sic] what would seem to be a natural
death." (Judyth Vary Baker, JFKresearch.com post, November 2, 2002.)
Or was this just another "typo"?
Dave
Dave Reitzes
Barb Junkkarinen wrote:
> Teue ...
Whoops!
Barb, if there is one thing I simply cannot abide, it's a typo.
Dave \:^)
jwrush
<jpsh...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1155909796.4...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
Martin Shackelford wrote:
> There is no connection, J.B.
> There is no mention of the Science Fair on p. 5 nor in Note 30. I have
> no idea where the idea came from that it was written at the time of the
> Science Fair. It wasn't.
> Another artificial link made by the hyenas looking for attack points.
>
> Martin
I noticed that this post by Mr. Lupschen quotes 26 facts
about Baker which places the Dungan letter in 1961 but
says Baker's letter was written at the suggestion
of George Smathers, not Eli Lilly:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5b8814057f5b9453?dmode=source&hl=en
"Senator George Smathers, Governor LeRoy Collins, and others appreciate
not only her cancer research, but her interest in fighting communism and
Castro. She is asked to write President Kennedy and receives a reply from
Ralph Dungan, Kennedy´s longtime friend and Latin American-anti-Castro
advisor."
J.B.
All high school biology majors were interested in "cancer research" in
1960. It was as popular as AIDS research and global warming research
today. Most Florida high school kids disliked Castro back then, especially
after they saw him hugging Khrushchev. The girl won a high school science
fair project, and that's it. She never got a medical degree, she went to
college only 2 years, she never even became medically educated enough to
become a nurse. Then she dropped out and got married and had a bunch of
kids. Now, in her old age, she's trying to make some money with a
badly-researched self-published fantasy hoax book.
Dave Reitzes
Martin Shackelford wrote:
> Where did I say the science seminar was in Indiana--nowhere, Barb.
> Please stop inventing things.
> Clearly the chronology got a bit jumbled--either in the writing or in
> the editing of that section of the book. Try to keep in mind that I
> neither wrote nor edited the text.
> There was the Science Fair; there was the letter to Walter Reed in
> September 1960; and there was the letter to Kennedy in the Spring of
> 1961, to which Dungan replied on May 21.
>
> Martin
Seven years of "Wait for the book! Wait for the book!"
Now Martin says the book is inaccurate, and Judyth says the REAL book
is still on its way.
And Martin attacks people (and accuses them of "inventing things") when
they simply try to determine what the facts of the matter are.
Dave
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
>
>Barb Junkkarinen wrote:
>> Teue ...
>
>
>Whoops!
>
>Barb, if there is one thing I simply cannot abide, it's a typo.
>
>Dave \:^)
Look, "genius" ... it's obviously just a chronology problem! Okay, a
whole wrong letter, but that's because my agent/editor/anybody but me
screwed up. I can't possibly be held accountable. You forget my typing
finger suffered 2 horrible concussive stubbings over the years. Or
it's because I left my keyboard out in the rain while trying to rescue
a cake .... somebody left it out in the rain and I don't think that I
can take it because it took so long to bake it and I'll never have
that recipe agaaaaaaain..... woe is me, don't you see. I'm just a
victim of circumstance, you insensitive lout. Poor me.
<VBG>
Moi :-)
Anthony Marsh
> On 19 Aug 2006 13:58:37 -0400, Anthony Marsh
> <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Barb Junkkarinen wrote:
>>> On 19 Aug 2006 12:00:45 -0400, Martin Shackelford
>>> <msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nope. There was clearly some chronological confusion, and I don't know
>>>> for sure at which stage of the process it crept in.
>>> This wasn't a "crept" ... this is an entire scenario laid out in a
>>> certain place and at a certain time with certain people around.
>>>
>>> In my opinion, the clearest and most likely explanation is that, for
>>> many people the fact that the President is not in office, at all, the
>>> year he is elected is oft overlooked.
>>>
>> Jeez, even President Kennedy understood and correctly explained the
>> phenomenon.
>>
>> It is the year of election which ends in zero, not the date of the
>> death. And also remembers that it includes death by natural causes or
>> accident as well as assassination.
>
> What in all that is holy are you talking about, Anthony?
>
I am not talking about Judyth. I am only answering someone's question
about the Zero Factor.
Martin Shackelford
received the reply in May 1961.
I'm tired of your blizzard of posts on this stupid subject.
Martin
Dave Reitzes
Barb Junkkarinen wrote:
> On 19 Aug 2006 16:05:15 -0400, "Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Barb Junkkarinen wrote:
> >> Teue ...
> >
> >
> >Whoops!
> >
> >Barb, if there is one thing I simply cannot abide, it's a typo.
> >
> >Dave \:^)
>
> Look, "genius" ... it's obviously just a chronology problem! Okay, a
> whole wrong letter, but that's because my agent/editor/anybody but me
> screwed up. I can't possibly be held accountable. You forget my typing
> finger suffered 2 horrible concussive stubbings over the years. Or
> it's because I left my keyboard out in the rain while trying to rescue
> a cake .... somebody left it out in the rain and I don't think that I
> can take it because it took so long to bake it and I'll never have
> that recipe agaaaaaaain..... woe is me, don't you see. I'm just a
> victim of circumstance, you insensitive lout. Poor me.
>
> <VBG>
>
> Moi :-)
Oh, Barb, how you cut me to the quick. Back when Lee and I had our
passionate affair, "MacArthur Park" was "our song" . . . the Donna
Summer version. Wait, I didn't say that! Howard Platzman inserted it
into my manuscript! I've got documents to prove it! Lee wrote our REAL
favorite song in the margin of one of my books! (Erase, erase, erase,
scribble, scribble, scribble.) It was "Abraham, Martin, and John"!
Wait, that doesn't work. It was . . . "Paperback Writer"! (Erase,
erase, erase, scribble, scribble, scribble.) Doh! Still a few years
off. Let me try Google . . .
Dave \:^)
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
How about Stop! In the name of love.... naw, that was way too late, I
think.....
:-^)
Barb :-)
PS: Bad visual, Dave ...."back when Lee and I had our passionate
affair...."
Barb Junkkarinen
<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Barb Junkkarinen wrote:
>> On 19 Aug 2006 13:58:37 -0400, Anthony Marsh
>> <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Barb Junkkarinen wrote:
>>>> On 19 Aug 2006 12:00:45 -0400, Martin Shackelford
>>>> <msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Nope. There was clearly some chronological confusion, and I don't know
>>>>> for sure at which stage of the process it crept in.
>>>> This wasn't a "crept" ... this is an entire scenario laid out in a
>>>> certain place and at a certain time with certain people around.
>>>>
>>>> In my opinion, the clearest and most likely explanation is that, for
>>>> many people the fact that the President is not in office, at all, the
>>>> year he is elected is oft overlooked.
>>>>
>>> Jeez, even President Kennedy understood and correctly explained the
>>> phenomenon.
>>>
>>> It is the year of election which ends in zero, not the date of the
>>> death. And also remembers that it includes death by natural causes or
>>> accident as well as assassination.
>>
>> What in all that is holy are you talking about, Anthony?
>>
>
>I am not talking about Judyth. I am only answering someone's question
>about the Zero Factor.
Not in this thread you aren't....nada about that here...
Barb :-)
Martin Shackelford
Martin
Barb Junkkarinen
<msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>Look, Barb, the letter was written in the Spring of 1961, and she
>received the reply in May 1961.
Of that I have no doubt. The reply might give us some insight as to
the letter she wrote but I don't expect we'll be seeing it anytime
soon. Many school girls wrote/write the President. A letter from
Dungan in 1961 ... or anytime ... means zero, zip, nada as to
documenting her tale.
Her stating flat out that she was taken to a "soundproof" type room at
Eli Lilly by assorted men while at the science fair in Indiana in 1960
where she signed loyalty oaths and WAS DIRECTED TO WRITE PRESIDENT
KENNEDY is the issue here.
And you realize that.
I don't doubt you are tired of lots of these issues. Because they will
not disappear just because you are dismissive about them ... and
because, as you well know, there are no plausible, satisfactory
explanations for them.
>I'm tired of your blizzard of posts on this stupid subject.
There have been a blizzard of posts on it because you kept
sidestepping the issue with the date on the Dungan reply she received
... just as you did again above.
If you think it's a "stupid subject" when a writer relates a detailed
scenario totally about the goings on at a particular place and time,
of which a crucial related element is flat out historically
impossible, then that is very telling about you and your interest in
the veracity of this story, imo.
It's not that it is a stupid subject ... it's that it is a devastating
one to her scenario. And you being dismissive and snippy at those who
find, point out and comment on these sorts of things isn't going to
make them go away.... nor does it do anything for you personally.
Barb
Dave Reitzes
Martin Shackelford wrote:
> Look, Barb, the letter was written in the Spring of 1961,
Why does the book say it was written in May 1960?
and she
> received the reply in May 1961.
Why haven't you posted it?
> I'm tired of your blizzard of posts on this stupid subject.
>
> Martin
Awwwwwwww.
People spent $50 + shipping on a book you now are making excuses for.
Dave
Anthony Marsh
> On 20 Aug 2006 01:15:11 -0400, Martin Shackelford
> <msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>
>> Look, Barb, the letter was written in the Spring of 1961, and she
>> received the reply in May 1961.
>
> Of that I have no doubt. The reply might give us some insight as to
> the letter she wrote but I don't expect we'll be seeing it anytime
> soon. Many school girls wrote/write the President. A letter from
> Dungan in 1961 ... or anytime ... means zero, zip, nada as to
> documenting her tale.
>
You talk about a letter from Dungan. Where is this letter? Show me this
letter. Where is the proof? Why would someone from the WH just randomly
decide to write a letter to a high school girl?
Barb Junkkarinen
<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Barb Junkkarinen wrote:
>> On 20 Aug 2006 01:15:11 -0400, Martin Shackelford
>> <msh...@concentric.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Look, Barb, the letter was written in the Spring of 1961, and she
>>> received the reply in May 1961.
>>
>> Of that I have no doubt. The reply might give us some insight as to
>> the letter she wrote but I don't expect we'll be seeing it anytime
>> soon. Many school girls wrote/write the President. A letter from
>> Dungan in 1961 ... or anytime ... means zero, zip, nada as to
>> documenting her tale.
>>
>
>You talk about a letter from Dungan. Where is this letter?
Martin says he has a copy.
> Show me this
>letter.
A few of us have asked for him to post it.
>Where is the proof?
Well, they say they have the letter so I guess that's the only proof
it exists at this point.
Goof point....as we've heard this before. :-)
> Why would someone from the WH just randomly
>decide to write a letter to a high school girl?
Don't think one randomly would or did ... I expect she wrote a letter
to the President just as many school kids do .... and someone replied.
The reply is dated 1961. So her letter to JFK was no doubt .... 1961,
particularly since he was not in office prior to 1961.
This letter is meaningless.
The issue is her claim of being whisked away to some soundproof type
room at Eli Lilly WHILE AT THE INDIANA SCIENCE FAIR IN 1960 .... at
which time she was ALSO directed to write to President kennedy.
The problem with that scenario is obvious.
So, ask Martin to rattle that letter loose if you'd like to see it. We
all would like to see it.
Barb :-)
Dave Reitzes
How 'bout . . .
"I can't get no-o . . . doc-u-men-ta-tion . . ."
> PS: Bad visual, Dave ...."back when Lee and I had our passionate
> affair...."
I've got pictures. Well, I would, but Jack Ruby's dog ate them.
Dave
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
ROTFL. Now that's a good one...
>
>
>> PS: Bad visual, Dave ...."back when Lee and I had our passionate
>> affair...."
>
>
>I've got pictures. Well, I would, but Jack Ruby's dog ate them.
Thank gawd.<g>
Barb :-)
>
>Dave
>
William Yates
If Judyth wrote Kennedy in 1961 the letter and presumably the response
from Dungan should be at the Kennedy Library. Maybe someone who lives
close to the Library could check. Martin doesn't seem to want to provide
it.
Barb Junkkarinen
<william_...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Good idea. There is someone who lives in Boston. Maybe he'll see to
it. But, personally, I don't doubt that she wrote to JFK and got a
response from someone in 1961 ... lots of kids write to the President.
I think the whole 1960 science fair scenario with being whisked away
to a soundproofed room at Eli Lilly, signing loyalty oaths and being
directed to write to JFK (offering her services to her country or
whatever it was) is preposterous beyond the pale. It's very creative.
Lot's of fiction is....and in my opinion, this whole scenario is
fiction.
Barb :-)
Anthony Marsh
I'll take a look, but I doubt the letters exist. Someone claimed that you
had the Dungan letter, so that is why I asked you. I hope to go to the
Kennedy Library later this week to pick up some more reinterment photos.
As you may know the Kennedy Library intends to put most of its collection
online, but it is a slow process.
Anthony Marsh
What if they have the letter, but withhold it? You have to remember that
the Kennedy Library destroyed 4 WH tapes and refuses to release the
transcripts of these tapes.
Dave Reitzes
a packet of files Judyth distributed some years ago to "trusted
researchers." The letter is dated May 20, 1961.
I'll try to post a .jpg file, but here's the text:
<QUOTE ON>-------------------------------------------
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 20, 1961
Dear Miss Vary:
The President has received your friendly letter, and he thanks you for
the nice things you say about him. Your desire to be of [illegible on
my copy] to your country has been noted and there are many ways you can
help our country through responsible citizenship at the community,
national, and international levels. I am enclosing [two illegible
words] which include some of the things the President has [illegible]
in this respect.
With the President's best wishes,
Sincerely,
Ralph A. Dungan
Special Assistant
[to the] President
<QUOTE OFF>-----------------------------------------
Dave
Michael O'Dell
Michael
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1156200094.7...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
>What was that evidence of again?
>
>Michael
Absolutely nothing other than that in 1961, like many school kids,
Judyth wrote JFK a letter saying nice things about him ... and she got
a reply.
The actual issue is that in her book, Judyth lays out this whole cloak
and dagger scenario about how when she was at the science fair in
Indiana in ***1960***, she was whisked away by a bunch of men, taken
to a soundproofed looking room at Eli Lilly, where she was given
loyalty oaths to sign and directed to write to PRESIDENT KENNEDY and
offer her services to her country.
If that in itself isn't enough to make you gag, ANYone writing to
PRESIDENT KENNEDY in ***1960*** should be. :-)
She wrote the whole scenario up that way in 2004 ... and it's that way
in her book now. BUT ... she did not include the letter from the White
House in the book .... could that be because it's clearly dated 1961
which doesn't go with her scenario/chronology? Did she not think
people would know threre was no President Kennedy in 1960 ... or did
that fact escape *her*?
Barb :-)
Barb Junkkarinen
<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
Thanks for being willing, Anthony, but probably not worth the bother.
The 1961 reply from Dungan has been posted ... turns out Dave R had it
in some old files. No copy of the letter she wrote to JFK though. But
it was obviously 1961.
So much for her mysterious Nancy Drew/Trixie Belden/Hardy Boys
adventure at the science fair in 1960. :-)
Barb :-)
Dave Reitzes
Michael O'Dell wrote:
> What was that evidence of again?
>
> Michael
In her book (p. 5) Judyth describes an incident that occurred "after I
won the Science Fair trip to Indianapolis in May of 1960":
<QUOTE ON>---------------------------
After I signed a loyalty oath -- as well as a couple of papers about
promising to always be loyal to my country in my scientific endeavors
-- in what seemed to be a recording studio or soundproof room at Eli
Lilly, I was asked to write to President John F. Kennedy, offering my
services to my country.[30]
<QUOTE OFF>--------------------------
>From endnote 30:
<QUOTE ON>---------------------------
The letter was written to Kennedy in May, 1960. JFK's personal
assistant with expertise in Latin American affairs, Ralph Dungan,
immediately wrote a reply, which is in my possession.
<QUOTE OFF>--------------------------
I requested that Judyth or Martin produce a copy of this intriguing
correspondence with the Kennedy White House from the year before
Kennedy took office. In addition, Judyth has linked this document to
her alleged recruitment into the CIA. See such statements as these:
"I knew important people, and in indianapolis [sic] got conscripted
into the CIA though [I] was just a minor." (Judyth Vary Baker, e-mail
to Dave Reitzes, October 6, 2000.)
"In short--and i [sic] can fill in many details--I had gone through
projects starting in indianapolis [sic] with my being, apparently,
conscripted into service of the CIA. I sa[y] apparently because i [sic]
was a minor, and my father may have signed papers for me. I signed a
lot of them, but I did not even bother to read them." (Judyth Vary
Baker, e-mail to Dave Reitzes, October 7, 2000.)
"I was introduced to people I suspected were working for the CIA. I was
never, myself, 'recruited' to my knowledge. I did sign loyalty
oaths---three of them." (Judyth Vary Baker, JFKresearch.com post,
November 14, 2002.)
Martin said that "1960" in Judyth's footnote was a typo, but ignored
requests to produce the important letter.
I didn't realize that I already had a copy of the document in my
database. The letter, as expected, turns out to be entirely innocuous;
and it's still not clear why Judyth's book specifically states that she
"was asked to write to President John F. Kennedy" in May of 1960 (or,
for that matter, why on Earth the CIA would ask a new recruit to write
a letter to the President in the first place).
Dave
Michael O'Dell
"Barb Junkkarinen" <barbRE...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hr4le2pral61bkttl...@4ax.com...
>>
>>Michael
>
> Judyth wrote JFK a letter saying nice things about him ... and she got
> a reply.
>
A form letter reply. Yes.
> The actual issue is that in her book, Judyth lays out this whole cloak
> and dagger scenario about how when she was at the science fair in
> Indiana in ***1960***, she was whisked away by a bunch of men, taken
> to a soundproofed looking room at Eli Lilly, where she was given
> loyalty oaths to sign and directed to write to PRESIDENT KENNEDY and
> offer her services to her country.
>
Even without the 1960 thing, is there anyone that can't see that she
obviously made up some story around a generic form letter response that she
saved? How obvious does it have to get?
I think the question recently asked of Martin is a good one. Why does he
believe her? Why did he expect everyone else to?
Michael
> If that in itself isn't enough to make you gag, ANYone writing to
> PRESIDENT KENNEDY in ***1960*** should be. :-)
>
> She wrote the whole scenario up that way in 2004 ... and it's that way
> in her book now. BUT ... she did not include the letter from the White
> House in the book .... could that be because it's clearly dated 1961
> which doesn't go with her scenario/chronology? Did she not think
> people would know threre was no President Kennedy in 1960 ... or did
> that fact escape *her*?
>
> Barb :-)
>>
Dave Reitzes
Michael O'Dell wrote:
> "Barb Junkkarinen" <barbRE...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:hr4le2pral61bkttl...@4ax.com...
> > On 21 Aug 2006 23:10:32 -0400, "Michael O'Dell" <ode...@comcast.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>What was that evidence of again?
> >>
> >>Michael
> >
> > Absolutely nothing other than that in 1961, like many school kids,
> > Judyth wrote JFK a letter saying nice things about him ... and she got
> > a reply.
> >
>
> A form letter reply. Yes.
>
> > The actual issue is that in her book, Judyth lays out this whole cloak
> > and dagger scenario about how when she was at the science fair in
> > Indiana in ***1960***, she was whisked away by a bunch of men, taken
> > to a soundproofed looking room at Eli Lilly, where she was given
> > loyalty oaths to sign and directed to write to PRESIDENT KENNEDY and
> > offer her services to her country.
> >
>
> Even without the 1960 thing, is there anyone that can't see that she
> obviously made up some story around a generic form letter response that she
> saved? How obvious does it have to get?
Bingo.
And this is one of the LEAST outlandish claims in her book.
Seriously.
> I think the question recently asked of Martin is a good one. Why does he
> believe her? Why did he expect everyone else to?
>
> Michael
Good questions.
Dave
jwrush
This is so silly. The letter is obviously a typical form letter in response
to some fan mail to Kennedy. Not only would Presidents not see or read 99.9%
of these letters from teenage fans, but the guy who signed the response
letter wouldn't bother writing the response letter himself. The White House
had a battery of secretaries, interns, low-level staff members, who typed up
these response letters and had different people sign them, so the kids who
wrote their letters to the President would think that President Kennedy
actually, personally, either read their letters or was told about them and
spent some time contemplating an appropriate response. Presidents don't have
time for this, and their top staff members don't have time for this. This is
what the secretaries and interns are for, but the whole system is set up to
make the fan-mail writers think that the entire White House, from the
President on down, stopped what they were doing to give individual attention
to responding to each fan-mail letter.
"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1156217318.8...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Anthony Marsh
If there is a reply letter I have yet to see it. But arguendo if it
exists that would indicate that there must have been an original letter
to reply to. So that original letter should be in the Kennedy Library.
I just got permission to reproduce the reinterment photos which no one
else has seen before, so I will also look for the original letter.
Curious though that the reply does not have her address. That is very
unusual for official correspondence. I do know that they have a special
collection of Dear Mr. President letters from the public.
Pamela McElwain-Brown
wrote:
>
>"Barb Junkkarinen" <barbRE...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:hr4le2pral61bkttl...@4ax.com...
>> On 21 Aug 2006 23:10:32 -0400, "Michael O'Dell" <ode...@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>What was that evidence of again?
>>>
>>>Michael
>>
>> Absolutely nothing other than that in 1961, like many school kids,
>> Judyth wrote JFK a letter saying nice things about him ... and she got
>> a reply.
>>
>
>A form letter reply. Yes.
>
>> The actual issue is that in her book, Judyth lays out this whole cloak
>> and dagger scenario about how when she was at the science fair in
>> Indiana in ***1960***, she was whisked away by a bunch of men, taken
>> to a soundproofed looking room at Eli Lilly, where she was given
>> loyalty oaths to sign and directed to write to PRESIDENT KENNEDY and
>> offer her services to her country.
>>
>
>Even without the 1960 thing, is there anyone that can't see that she
>obviously made up some story around a generic form letter response that she
>saved? How obvious does it have to get?
>
>I think the question recently asked of Martin is a good one. Why does he
>believe her? Why did he expect everyone else to?
>
>Michael
[...]>
I'm getting the impression that those who support Judyth have been
caught up in the frenzy of her statements coupled with some uncanny
coincidences (mice, for one) plus her stated documentation to LHO in
NO in the summer of '63. Once one becomes acquainted with Judyth it
is very difficult to remain objective. I sincerely doubt that anyone
close to her has played Devil's Advocate and confronted the unanswered
questions. It becomes a kind of Judytheism, involving a leap of
faith, instead of reason and cold logic.
So, another reasonable question for Martin is to ask why he continues
to support Judyth's statements and try to insist that we do (or
should), when so much of the research community is not swept away by7
her statements or her credentials. Why not instead address the issues
that are creating the disconnect, such as the seeming lack of
documentation connecting Judyth to Sherman or Ochsner, much less that
of the existence of a secret clandestine program with a rogue lab?
Pamela
Dave Reitzes
More good questions.
Dave
Dave Reitzes
Barb Junkkarinen wrote:
> Thanks for being willing, Anthony, but probably not worth the bother.
> The 1961 reply from Dungan has been posted ... turns out Dave R had it
> in some old files. No copy of the letter she wrote to JFK though. But
> it was obviously 1961.
>
> So much for her mysterious Nancy Drew/Trixie Belden/Hardy Boys
> adventure at the science fair in 1960. :-)
>
> Barb :-)
Check this out, Barb.
>From a 1999 draft of Judyth's book posted to a.c.jfk:
> On 20 Aug 2006 21:02:49 -0700, "Shadow-It" <Shad...@hush.com> wrote:
[snip]
> >Body Text As a result of all this activity, I won a Florida Academy of
> >Sciences Award of Excellence, a Certificate of Recognition from the
> >Florida
> >Medical Association, and scholarships from The Florida Medical
> >Association, and The American Cancer Society =A9=A9 the last for four
> >years, at the college of my choice, all tuition paid. Earlier that same
> >year, Florida Senator George Smathers began to show an interest in my
> >career. He telephoned me and asked if I would like to use my abilities
> >in the fight against communism, suggesting that I volunteer my services
> >by writing President Kennedy directly. After the President received my
> >letter, the Senator said he would arrange for me to be given additional
> >materials and resources, although I would have to do this in roundabout
> >fashion by requesting this support in writing from Walter Reed.
> >Smathers also sent a letter of congratulations, dated February 7, 1961,
> >for winning honors in the 20th Annual Science Talent Search, a
> >competition sponsored by the Westinghouse Corporation. Smathers wrote:
> >"I sincerely hope that you will continue to develop the scientific
> >ability recognized in this contest, and that this will be only one of
> >many honors that you will receive for your work." The letterhead
> >carries "Committee on Finance" designation and indeed, money enabling
> >me to continue her work was sent to me through Col. Doyle. Other
> >members of Smather's committee who called me included Louisiana Senator
> >Russell Long and Minnesota Senator Eugene McCarthy. =C1 =C1I did as
> >Senator Smathers asked and wrote an unexceptional letter to the
> >President, to which I received an
> >unexceptional reply, albeit on White House stationary, dated May 20,
> >1961, and signed by Ralph A. Dungan, Special Assistant to the
> >President.
Note the COMPLETELY different scenario behind her letter to President
Kennedy.
To review: in her book Judyth describes it as having occurred "after I
won the Science Fair trip to Indianapolis in May of 1960."
<QUOTE ON>---------------------------
I found myself whisked away from the university medical center to meet
a few military officers and more scientists, finally ending up in a
pharmaceutical research center area at Eli Lilly. Neither Mr. Scharer
(my chemistry instructor) nor my mother had any idea where I had gone .
. .
After I signed a loyalty oath -- as well as a couple of papers about
promising to always be loyal to my country in my scientific endeavors
-- in what seemed to be a recording studio or soundproof room at Eli
Lilly, I was asked to write to President John F. Kennedy, offering my
services to my country.[30] I was not aware until later that one or
more of the people I was talking to represented the CIA. (Judyth Baker,
LEE HARVEY OSWALD, pp. 4-5.)
<QUOTE OFF>--------------------------
>From endnote 30:
<QUOTE ON>---------------------------
The letter was written to Kennedy in May, 1960 [sic]. JFK's personal
assistant with expertise in Latin American affairs, Ralph Dungan,
immediately wrote a reply, which is in my possession.
<QUOTE OFF>--------------------------
In the 1999 draft she simply receives a phone call from George
Smathers, suggesting she write the letter.
No Science Fair, no Eli Lilly, no soundproof room, no loyalty oaths, no
CIA, no nuthin'.
Dave
Barb Junkkarinen
<pame...@mindspring.com> wrote:
Exactly, Pamela. And I directly posted the question to Martin the
other ... just what is it that convinces him about Judyth. He
declined to answer ... something about not wanting to hand it to
Retzes on a platter. What kind of nonsense is taht?
Barb :-)
Barb Junkkarinen
<anthon...@comcast.net> wrote:
Great, Anthony - go for it.
Barb :-)
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
>
>Barb Junkkarinen wrote:
>> Thanks for being willing, Anthony, but probably not worth the bother.
>> The 1961 reply from Dungan has been posted ... turns out Dave R had it
>> in some old files. No copy of the letter she wrote to JFK though. But
>> it was obviously 1961.
>>
>> So much for her mysterious Nancy Drew/Trixie Belden/Hardy Boys
>> adventure at the science fair in 1960. :-)
>>
>> Barb :-)
>
>
>Check this out, Barb.
>
>>From a 1999 draft of Judyth's book posted to a.c.jfk:
Yes, indeed, Dave ... good find. And a telling one. Also note that in
this 1999 version, she still had to write Walter Reed to ask for
research materials. And because there is a copy of the reply to her
from Walter Reed in her book, we know that request to Walter Reed was
made in the summer of 1960.
So, even in 1999 with a whole different scenario, she still had
herself being told to write to President Kennedy in 1960.
I really think the 1960 problem got by her (not to mention all of her
supporters, editors, helpers, etc) .... and now we have that same prob
as part of two different scenarios.
I don't know how anyone can accept and make excuses for this and not
have extremely serious questions about the veracity of any of it.
Thanks for posting this.
Barb :-)
tomnln
See WCR page 541 in reference to K's back/throat wounds.
"jwrush" <jwr...@advantas.net> wrote in message
news:44eb...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
Anthony Marsh
> This is so silly. The letter is obviously a typical form letter in response
> to some fan mail to Kennedy. Not only would Presidents not see or read 99.9%
> of these letters from teenage fans, but the guy who signed the response
> letter wouldn't bother writing the response letter himself. The White House
> had a battery of secretaries, interns, low-level staff members, who typed up
> these response letters and had different people sign them, so the kids who
> wrote their letters to the President would think that President Kennedy
> actually, personally, either read their letters or was told about them and
> spent some time contemplating an appropriate response. Presidents don't have
> time for this, and their top staff members don't have time for this. This is
> what the secretaries and interns are for, but the whole system is set up to
> make the fan-mail writers think that the entire White House, from the
> President on down, stopped what they were doing to give individual attention
> to responding to each fan-mail letter.
>
You seem to miss the key points. Was there really any reply letter? If so
wouldn't there have to be a letter from Judyth to which he'd be sending a
reply? I urge caution lest you WC defenders give an inch and admit that
any part of her story is true. You are afraid that if you do so, it'll be
like Dracula turning you into conspiracy vampires.
Anthony Marsh
> "Barb Junkkarinen" <barbRE...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:hr4le2pral61bkttl...@4ax.com...
>> On 21 Aug 2006 23:10:32 -0400, "Michael O'Dell" <ode...@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> What was that evidence of again?
>>>
>>> Michael
>> Absolutely nothing other than that in 1961, like many school kids,
>> Judyth wrote JFK a letter saying nice things about him ... and she got
>> a reply.
>>
>
> A form letter reply. Yes.
>
>> The actual issue is that in her book, Judyth lays out this whole cloak
>> and dagger scenario about how when she was at the science fair in
>> Indiana in ***1960***, she was whisked away by a bunch of men, taken
>> to a soundproofed looking room at Eli Lilly, where she was given
>> loyalty oaths to sign and directed to write to PRESIDENT KENNEDY and
>> offer her services to her country.
>>
>
> Even without the 1960 thing, is there anyone that can't see that she
> obviously made up some story around a generic form letter response that she
> saved? How obvious does it have to get?
I see. So lacking any evidence you stipulate to a fact, that there was a
reply letter? Where did the reply letter come from unless there was an
original letter received? Was Dungan in the habit of writing letters to
random high school girls? Again, I urge caution for all you WC defenders.
Don't admit anything or you might turn into a conspiracy believer.