Sunday, 21 March 2010

"Why I Believe Judyth Vary Baker" by Dean Hartwell

Dean Hartwell, the author of Dead Men Talking: Consequences of Government Lies and Truth Matters How the Voters Can Take Back Their Nation, is a remarkable man who is not afraid to pursue the truth. You can read about his recent experience as "Juror #12" here. Dean had a front row seat about 'inside deals' and 'conspiracies' and corruption, too.

Since then, trained in law, he has turned his critical attention to the greatest cover-ups of our time, regarding JFK, RFK, and 9/11. His fine book, Dead Men Talking, provides a readable, clear, and logical handbook about these three events. It should prove very useful to new generations that needs to come to grips with about a power structure that, overtly or covertly, has exercised control since the coup that took John Kennedy's life.

Dean is far more thorough than many students of history. He contacted me for information about Lee Oswald and had incisive questions. He understands the failings of the "official versions" of these events and how cover-ups are implemented. He has been impelled--in part, by his own personal experiences--to expose how cover-ups work. With his legal training and keen intellect, he isn't easily fooled by disinfo artists and their rhetoric. I'm honored to be his friend.

Why I Believe Judyth Vary Baker
Dean Hartwell / 21 March 2010

Dean Hartwell in support of Judyth Vary Baker. Dean has the right background to use to write about truth in government. He has degrees in political science, public administration and law. His employment resume includes over fifteen years experience serving the public for three Southern California cities.

For over ten years, Judyth Vary Baker has stated that she had a relationship with Lee Harvey Oswald, that she knew he was an informant for our government and that he was innocent of any wrongdoing in the murder of President Kennedy.

As her book, Me and Lee, approaches publication, a question will continue to attract debate in the community of JFK assassination researchers and perhaps continue into the mainstream of political discussion: Should we believe her?

It is reasonable for one to ask some questions about what she says. Here is what went through my mind when I first heard of her:

What has she got to gain by saying it?

If it is money or fame, it pales in comparison to what she has lost: contact with family members, the feeling of safety (she lives overseas due to threats to her life) and any chance at a normal life. In short, I do not see great gain personally, but rather a need to vindicate a man she loved.

If she is making up a story, is it plausible she would choose this one? Those who spin tales tend to make themselves heroes. But Judyth doesn’t as she admits she made mistakes. Or they tell a story that would keep them safe, like saying that the man the government said was guilty was truly so. Not so here. Or they make a “non-falsifiable claim,” or something impossible to disprove. But Judyth has offered proof of her relationship with Lee (see “14 Reasons to Believe Judyth Vary Baker” - and has subjected her statements to the public.

Speaking of, what types of criticism she has received by some in the community of JFK experts? Some have cited what they believe to be inconsistencies in Judyth’s story. But even if I were to stipulate to that, it would be normal for one recalling events from almost a half century ago to forget or confuse some things. The real question is whether the inconsistencies relate to material issues. Judyth’s story about meeting Lee, having a relationship with him, his innocence, etc. have remained constant.

I had already believed in Lee Oswald’s innocence and the possibility he was an informant before I met Judyth. She told me what she knew first-hand but never insisted I had to believe it. She gave me a glimpse of who he really was and what motivated him. She told all of this to me in what I felt was a straight-forward manner.

Judyth has given Lee Oswald back the presumption of innocence he never received in real life. All of us in the JFK community should give her that presumption before making the decision as to whether to believe her.

Saturday, 20 March 2010

Measuring up: The 'Lee' and 'Harvey' photo comparison

Editor's note: This is not intended as a dismissal of the massive documentary trail of John Armstrong, HARVEY & LEE: HOW THE CIA FRAMED OSWALD (2003), but as a commentary on some of the evidence that has been adduced in support of Armstrong's thesis of "the two Oswalds". Even if some of the "evidence" is not well-founded, this does not mean that his thesis is false. Because of her background in physical anthropology, however, Judyth is well-positioned to address the photographs.


Time to talk about the two photos that some people think means two different skulls, re 'Lee' and 'Harvey'. First of all, I have a slight advantage with a degree in physical anthropology, which is a B.S., not a B.A.

I had to learn to measure and reconstruct actual human and primate skulls and skeletons of all ages and from various geologic time periods--from millions of years old to modern times.

The two photos below have often been used to demonstrate that 'Harvey' and 'Lee' are different people. But there are good reasons to doubt that that is the case:

They look different. If it's the same person, then what happened?

Distorted photos of Lee as shown on the Education Forum and elsewhere require distortion corrections.

Measurements are now the same--the width between the eyebrows where they meet in the center and the size of the eyes are both corrected.

The distortion was 10%--significant. The photo called “Harvey” was shown as ‘too fat.’ When the distortion is corrected, the skull shapes match ‘Lee’ even though the ‘Lee’ figure is younger, and the cheekbones are not yet well-developed.

Still, the receding hairline on the right (Lee’s left) has already begun. The unique eyebrow lines are also the same—e.g. Lee’s right eyebrow—to the left for us.

The nose has slightly matured, as expected, and become slightly more dominant as the facial bones matured. Even though the arrest photo shows a swollen left eye, slightly raising the eyebrow, the same eyebrow line is present for ‘Harvey’ and ‘Lee.’

Further, the ears--when distortion is removed--are exactly the same. The ‘young’ Lee to the right is the same as the 24-year-old Lee, center.

However, for some reason, photo to the left was widened, distorting the skull, shortening the jawline, and making the space between the eyes too great.

The photos above these three are all shown at the same eye-widths. The ear widths also fall into place at the same time at identical distances apart from each other—same skull.

I have vision problems, so this study can be duplicated with precise measurements (10%, 12%, etc.). Widening distortions happen with lenses. That’s why people tended to look ‘fatter’ when TV’s had curved screens.

And when a photo is taken of a photo, instead of a direct copy being made, and then it’s copied again, similar distortions can occur.

Here is a 10% distortion of Carlos Bringuier’s photo on the right. These are ‘THE SAME’ photos. But if we have different photos of Bringuier, notice what we can do:

These are the same people…but the photo to the left has 10% distortion.

Is one ‘Carlos’ and the other an impostor--a ‘Carlitos’? Of course not.

We must recognize how to analyze using undistorted photos—many of Lee H. Oswald’s photos have been altered, retouched…

We take the outer ear measurement, the measurements at the outer edge of the eyes, the width from pupil to pupil, the width between eyebrows, the shape of ears and eyebrows, and be aware of maturing bone structures.

So much can happen in just a few years…

Others may wish to go beyond the attached introductory study, taking measurements for yourselves on photos corrected for distortion.

But do your homework and learn about skull and bone structure in maturing individuals before deciding about 'Harvey' and 'Lee'.

Always be aware that photo retouching was done, photo flipping, too, and occasional deliberate distortions....

A couple of courses in forensic anthropology, where you have to reconstruct faces from skulls, can be useful, too.


Friday, 19 March 2010

Jim Fetzer interviews Judyth Vary Baker

Jim Fetzer interviewed me for his YouTube channel JamesFetzerNews on 26 February and 1 March.

And this is a transcript of our first interview, where our connection was not very good and some of what I had to say was garbled. I would like to thank Michael L. Sparks for translating the interview. Mike is a 1988 graduate of Liberty University, with a Bachelor of Science degree in history education. He leads a non-profit, think-tank, 1st Tactical Studies Group (Airborne), originally based out of Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

JF = James Fetzer Ph.D.
JVB = Judyth Vary Baker

JF: "This is Jim Fetzer with ‘JamesFetzerNews’ and I have the extraordinary opportunity to have as my guest Judyth Vary Baker, who has been living in exile harassed by virtue of her associations, which many challenge, with Lee Oswald in New Orleans. Judyth, it's a pleasure to have you on the show."

JVB: "Thank you, Jim."

JF: "For the sake of those who want to learn more, I have done a blog about Judyth at jamesfetzer.blogspot. Check it out. You'll learn more about her. Judyth … one of the most convincing aspects of your life story in relation to with your association with Lee Oswald is the massive harassment to which you have been subjected. It’s been a veritable horror story."

JVB: "Yeah, it's been real fun."

JF: "’It’s been real fun!’ [laughing]. In fact, you've had to live in one country after another. Weird accidents and attempts have been made on your life. And I must tell you [that] to me, it was astonishing that, when I put up your blog, I received the first death threat I have ever received in about 20 years of doing research on JFK. It wasn't directly mentioning you but, I take it …"

JVB: "No, they wouldn't want to do that."

JF: "That would be too obvious, huh?"

JVB: "Yeah."

JF: "Tell us just a little bit about your association with Lee in New Orleans."

JVB: "He's not like he's been presented. … In fact, a lot of the photos that are shown of Lee that you see will show him smirking and things like that. But you don’t see that in any of the TV” [missing words: … in any of the TV shots of him … where the photos can’t be retouched or selected for the ugliest of them,] Lee Oswald looked miserable … disgusted … tired … he was not ‘smirking.’

JF: "Jud …"

JVB: [But he had a sense of humor and laughed easily and things like that] … He sounded like you in a way—happy … laughing!”

JF: "I’ve heard various … you know, different reports about him, and I'm very interested in your characterization of his personality and character."

JVB: "He's been demonized. You ought to see what they say about me. I'm not really ‘a big fat whore’—honest!”

JF: laughs

JVB: “I’ve lost about 50 pounds since those photos were taken. I had just got out of the hospital when Nigel Turner … saw me on tape with steroids and everything for inflammation and went back and had it [filmed a little later when I felt better, but I was still in pain and not feeling well] ….”

The Love Affair (The Men Who Killed Kennedy)

JF: "Well, Judyth, I'll tell you, a few of us have added a few pounds over the years. I must confess to be in that category myself. Tell us: There was this unusual incident where he was accosted by some pro-Castro Cubans that he associated with because he was handing out Fair Play for Cuba pamphlets."

JVB: laughs

JF: "Tell me about that incident and what he told you about it."

JVB: "Well, uh, he showed me an article, umm … I remember at [1032—my apartment] that he showed me an article from the May 4th 1963 edition of The Times-Picayune. And there it says ‘23-year old young man accosted’—he was really pretending to be a drug dealer and he was undercover agent—and this young man was at one point beaten by 3 men. But he did all of this because he was undercover, and he finally exposed the ring. And he said, ‘This is what I’m going to do’. He said, ‘These guys are going to pretend to get mad at me and beat me up’. And I said, 'I'm so worried!' And he said, 'Don't worry. They'll just punch me in the nose or something. They won’t really hurt me ….' So I have a lot of stuff like that. I can show you his motivation and plans that were behind them and why he’d do it. [I was] with Lee at total of--face-to-face--155 days … 130 days, I mean. Excuse me. We weren’t face-to-face … [it was] 155 days of direct contact. And … altogether … a total of 203 days." [Added by JVB: By direct contact, I meant at least we spoke on the phone … face-to-face approximately 130 days]

JF: "Judyth, I know that he, when he was a child, enjoyed this program with Herb Philbrick ,'I Led Three Lives'. Did he ever mention that to you?"

JVB: "Oh, absolutely! In fact there is a photograph of me in one of the Buffalo newspapers—as I was in that part of the world because of my cancer research at that time—[Added by JVB: Lee was looking at my newspaper articles and photos and things …]

JF: "Judyth … Judyth, we’re having an interruption in our recording, but continue. We, we’ll use it anyway. Go ahead".

JVB: "OK. At any rate, the newspaper article—when you're looking at it—in Buffalo New York—when you turn it over you saw a newspaper [section of] TV programs that were listed. And there it was, right on the back of my newspaper article, which I still have to this day, is 'I Led 3 Lives', which shows that it was being shown. He said he liked it. He'd seen it while visiting in New York--not in fact as Robert Oswald says. And it was first broadcast in New York. He saw two things: one, he saw Herbert Philbrick kissing his wife with such passion that it brought tears to his eyes—when she finally found out who he really was. And the other umm …. the other incident is when he got on his knees and began to weep; then he says, 'I want to serve my country'."

JF: "Judyth, tell me, you've undoubtedly seen over and over the video after his arrest in Dallas. Was that the same man that was in the video tapes that you knew in New Orleans?"

JVB: "Oh, oh, yes, yes! He had lost weight but he was the same person. It was absolutely the same person. However, he told me that he knew he was being impersonated and that was fine with him. He stopped using 'Harvey' as his middle name in approximately 1959, because people, like the [Marine] secretaries, kept thinking he was writing 'Henry' instead of 'Harvey'. He just started using an "H" after that. I suspect whenever you see the name 'Lee Harvey Oswald' written out …

JF: "Yes."

JVB: "… after 1959, well, that’s not really his handwriting, like with doing a document to visit Castro, but is false, fake.”"

JF: "After 1959?"

JVB: "That's right. So we're talking about that Mexico City trip to Mexico …."

JF: "Yes, yes"

JVB: “It [the letter to Hunt] was false, fake.”

JF: "Do you think he was ever in Mexico City, or was the whole thing fabricated?"

JVB: "Well, he was never at … from what he told me at least he was never at that hotel that they say he stayed at. He stayed at a Quaker establishment. Scared the devil out of them! And he kept pretending to be a drug dealer … And he did that because he had a lot of Quaker connections, [remember Ruth Paine,] had them, too. He had learned passive resistance techniques and the Quaker teacher was a CIA guy over there while in Japan. There are a lot of things I know that people never ask me. If you ask me, I'll give you the details."

JF: "Did he ever claim to have gone to the Cuban Embassy?"

JVB: "He never told me that he went in. He told me he went there with someone and I also speculated that they couldn't show the [real] picture [of Oswald], because they couldn't take that person [who was with him] out of the picture."

JF: "Well, there are photographs there that look nothing like Lee."

JVB: "That's not him. Of course not."

JF: "They had audio tapes. They were also not like Lee."

JVB: "No, there were things going on. I also suspected they had to get him down to Mexico somehow so they could later blame him. So they could have had anybody actually courier the material we were working, on go down there and hand it off, but they chose him now I feel that was to implicate him in a—you know— …"

JF: "J. Edgar Hoover even issued a directive to his Agents-in-Charge that someone in Mexico City was impersonating Lee Harvey Oswald. Then he later had them all retracted. I think only copy survived. Are you aware of that?"

JVB: "No, I didn't know of any of this stuff. I only heard what they told me because, after he was shot, I went in shock … I didn't know Jack Ruby and Jack Rubenstein were the same people. You know, I only heard the back [ground noise] … I turned it all off. I cannot tell you what it feels like seeing someone you love shot in front of you. I can’t tell you. I can’t”.

JF: "Yes, yes. I can appreciate that."

JF: "Let me ask you this. There has been recent controversy because a Dartmouth computer scientist has claimed that the back yard photographs of Lee are authentic. He only actually studied one photograph and one aspect of the photograph—the nose shadow. Do you have an opinion about this?"

JVB: "Well, I think my opinion is easily understood. First of all, I never saw Lee with that rifle. By the way, I did see him with a .38 caliber Smith & Wesson long-nose—not snub-nose. Nothing like the junk [they show now] … Lee knew a lot about guns and he wouldn't have had junk like that carbine, that Italian carbine. He never would have purchased anything by mail order. The mail order itself, Jim, has a lot that shows it’s not from him. But you probably know all that already, so I won’t go into that, I won’t go on with that. He never [posed] for that."

JF: "Judyth, I'm so grateful to have you on with me and I hope that we will be able to do many other of these interviews. Meanwhile, I want to mention, if anyone wishes to learn more about Judyth Vary Baker, just enter the name ‘Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile’ and it will carry you to the blog. Judyth, I want to say, I believe in you and I wish you well and I look forward to our next conversation."

JVB: "Well, God bless you, Jim. All I can say is, that if we were to meet face to face and not just through the internet, I think that they and you would understand why I continue to speak for Lee for new generations."

JF: "Thanks!"

Saturday, 13 March 2010

14 Reasons to Believe in Judyth Vary Baker

REASON #1. Documents and researchers prove Baker and Oswald worked together for months at Wm. B. Reily Co., a coffee company in New Orleans, and that these jobs were pre-arranged cover jobs:

a) The A-1 employment agency shows records for both Oswald and Baker. Reily Coffee Company interviewed both Baker and Oswald on the same day (May 9, 1963). The Reily ads were 2 weeks old, but no one was hired until Baker and Oswald were interviewed. Note: Baker has much additional corroborating evidence, such as check stubs, w-2 forms, exactly matching Oswald’s dates, plus:
b) Oswald, as a ‘gift’ on Baker’s birthday, May 15, pretended to job-hunt at A-1 again, and though employed at Reily’s, told A-1 nothing about having been hired there; at this time, Oswald is on record for the visit, which was to induce A-1 to reduce an unjust fee placed against Baker by A-1, due on May 27. Baker has all relevant records for this event.
c) They were interviewed and hired the same day (May 9) by the same person.
d) They began work the same day, on May 10, at the same address, a block from Reily Coffee Co.
e) They were working in the same small sub-company of Reily, called The Standard Coffee Company, even though that small suite did not have a maintenance man (Oswald’s job for Reily) and Baker was Vice President William Monaghan’s secretary (Monaghan’s two offices were located in the Reily building). Baker was there to launder Oswald’s past so he could transfer with a clean record to Reily’s, for Oswald had been a fake defector to the USSR and had returned from that mission without arrest or detaining, to start new assignments. Reily was known for its ‘patriotic’ anti-communist position.
f) Both Oswald and Baker were transferred on the same day, one week later, to Reily, across the street.
g) The day Oswald was fired (July 19) an ad was ordered to replace Baker; a modified ad with more inducements appeared 2 weeks later when the first ad did not produce a replacement for Baker.
h) The day Oswald was arrested for distributing pro-Castro pamphlets (August 9) Baker was forced to resign. Baker had been at Reily’s primarily to cover for Oswald’s and her activities elsewhere.
i) Baker and Oswald rode the same bus to and from work (Magazine St. bus): there was only one stop between their respective bus stops; their apartments were within walking distance; both Oswald and Baker lived within minutes of each other, and key persons and places mentioned in Edward T. Haslam’s shocking new book (see below). Oswald and Baker bonded when he helped her after a police raid.

Bus 11, riding the Magazine Street.

REASON #2: Baker has the testimonies of living witnesses confirming her intimate relationship with Oswald in New Orleans:

a) William “Mac” McCullough, who was a musician, bouncer and bodyguard for New Orleans godfather Carlos Marcello, describes seeing Oswald and Baker together at a park, a restaurant, and seeing them together on several other occasions. His mother worked at a restaurant where Baker and Oswald ate, and he also saw them at a hotel where he sang and played the piano.
b) Anna Lewis, wife of DAVID FRANKLIN LEWIS (known witness in JFK murder case) who was a private investigator for Guy Banister and an associate with Jack Martin in investigations and political activities in New Orleans, has testified on two audiotapes and on film that she and her husband accompanied Baker and Oswald on double dates in New Orleans, plus sessions of talk at Thompson’s Restaurant in New Orleans, over a period of months. Lewis was pressured to recant her statements but refused to do so.

Video interview with Anna Lewis

c) Baker told her sister, Lynda, that her secret lover had been killed while serving his country, and that he was working for the government in secret missions on the first anniversary of Oswald’s death in 1964, charging Lynda never to mention the matter again. Lynda finally spoke out decades later after Baker released her from this promise.

REASON #3: Baker identified former Customs Agent Charles Thomas, also known as Arthur Young, as the person who was introduced to her by Oswald as the agent who expedited Oswald’s passport (along with others, to disguise the matter) to be issued only 24 hours after requested. Thomas described meeting and befriending Oswald in Buffalo, New York, when Oswald was a young teen.

a) Baker described tattoos on the fingers, silver hair, German accent, his previous Customs station in Buffalo, NY, his connection to anti-Castroites and to the Mafia in Miami, and marriage to a Chitimacha Indian woman to Thomas’ granddaughter, whom she met in a class at The University of Louisiana at Lafayette, LA.
b) The granddaughter, Kelly Thomas, verified that Charles Thomas also used the name Arthur Young, and then brought forth photos showing Cuban and mafia associates; the granddaughter and her family also had photos showing the tattoos on the fingers, the silver hair, verified the German accent and the Customs post in Buffalo, NY, which Thomas headed, even having a photo of the customs station at Buffalo. Charles Thomas had been dead for years and had kept his past a secret from the outside world, living in obscurity on the Chitimacha Indian reservation with his Chitimacha wife after the assassination.
c) Baker contacted researcher Joan Mellen with details about Thomas; Mellen later wrote in her book that she had obtained evidence that Oswald worked with Customs and described his connections to Customs, without giving Baker any credit for the lead. This lack of giving credit has occurred several times with researchers.

REASON #4: Baker has provided a cashed $30 American Express money order receipt dated May 27, 1963, linked to her bank records and receipts and to letters from Oswald indicating his use of $30 for office rent on the same date.

a) The American Express receipt is linked in such a way as to show it was illogical for Baker to have purchased it for any reason other than to give Oswald an untraceable $30 ‘donation’ that he, with limited income, would not have to account for via his small salary. $30 = approx. $270 in today’s funds.
b) An American Express file about Oswald exists in Rotterdam, Holland.
c) Oswald received multiple American Express money orders from an unknown source in 1963.
d) Witness Delphine Roberts has testified to Anthony Summers that Oswald had an office.

REASON #5: Baker has a green glass which has been in her possession since 1963, given to her by Oswald, known to many by 1980 as given to her by Oswald.

a) Over 30 people heard Baker, in 1980, explain that the glass had been given to her by Lee Harvey Oswald at Reily company, in 1963, and that they had ‘worked together’ there.
b) Baker’s son, Josiah, has confirmed this; he also remembered his mother describing streetcar and bus rides with Oswald in New Orleans.
c) Baker’s daughter, Sarah, remembers accidentally throwing away a note that Oswald wrote that was kept in the glass, and has been able to describe the note, and how upset her mother was. This event occurred during a household move from Orlando, Florida, to Lafayette, Louisiana. She also affirms that the green glass was given to her mother by Oswald.

REASON #6: Baker provides evidence that her job and Oswald’s job at Reily’s were cover jobs for clandestine activities elsewhere.

a) Baker provides time cards and clock-in/clock-out records showing Oswald’s outrageously late clock-ins, for which he was unaccountably not docked, while others who were late were docked, with Warren Commission testimonies backing her information; the clock-outs are precise, the clock-ins, irregular. Baker provides explanations: these and other details, such as 4907 mail problems, were not noticed by researchers--until Baker pointed out much that was obviously wrong in the official record.
b) Baker provides inside knowledge of Oswald’s whereabouts that for the first time explains them logically, with important direct and circumstantial evidence to support her statements; many of her statements have been confirmed later by other researchers, following her leads; usually, she was not given any credit for these leads, but comparing her statements with researchers’ ‘finds’ confirm her pre-knowledge.
c) Baker provides a financial information/character report on Oswald showing how it was deliberately created and rigged by herself and Oswald to cover up Oswald’s past, including his nearly 3-year stay in Russia as a defector, so that the highly conservative, anti-communist Reily Co. would be able to employ Oswald; a close and careful examination of all testimony concerning this document proves collusion.

REASON #7: Edward T. Haslam investigated Baker and has confirmed her ability to conduct secret lab activities in New Orleans as described thoroughly in his landmark 2007 book, Dr. Mary’s Monkey. Haslam, a New Orleans native who knew some of the persons encountered by Baker and Oswald, only learned about Baker’s still being alive through Sixty Minutes investigators. Haslam describes Baker and Oswald’s clandestine activity together in New Orleans, with verified information as to its importance.

a) Baker provides substantial reasons for why she should never have been employed at Reily’s as a Vice President’s secretary, when her expertise was in cancer research and medical technology: New Orleans’ Ochsner Clinic was world-renowned as a cancer research center.
b) It’s reasonable to assume that Baker would not leave her studies, family, and friends in Florida simply to become a secretary in New Orleans. Her ease in obtaining a well-paying chemistry research position soon after her return to Florida proves she had no reason to leave unless it was originally, as she asserts, to work under the prestigious Doctors Ochsner and Sherman.
c) Haslam himself is a living witness that Judyth Vary Baker was impersonated in New Orleans in the 1970’s when he was trying to find out more information about the clandestine lab activities.

Interview with Ed Haslam, author of "Dr. Mary’s Monkey"

REASON #8: Film producer Nigel Turner had successfully presented six documentaries in the popular series, The Men Who Killed Kennedy, a secure fixture on The History Channel that ran more than two decades. On the recommendation of known CIA asset Gerry Hemming, Turner investigated Baker and her witnesses for over a year. He photographed much of her evidence. He filmed her for 38 hours and matched 55 hours of her spoken testimony taken months earlier on a tape recorder with her filmed testimony. He had witnesses Baker knew nothing about verifying many of her statements. Turner was contracted by The History Channel to produce two more documentaries in the popular series--The Smoking Guns, and The Guilty Men--but requested and received permission (and then filmed) a third segment – The Love Affair, about Oswald and Baker’s romance and clandestine activities together in New Orleans, and their continuing relationship until Oswald’s death two days after Kennedy’s assassination. But Turner got too close to the truth, and all hell broke loose, destroying his series.

The Love Affair (The Men Who Killed Kennedy)

a) The Love Affair was the first and only time in Turner’s series where only one person–-Baker--was featured for the entire documentary. Though banned in America, it is currently an underground favorite on YouTube and is a popular underground film overseas.
b) Living witness statements supporting Baker’s testimony were illegally withheld by a third hostile party who essentially stole the videotapes. They were later recovered, but were not included in the documentary. There may have been plans to produce a sequel to the documentary with witnesses.
c) There was an outcry from Official Version Oswald-did-it important people, such as former President Ford, Jack Valenti and Mrs. Lyndon Johnson and her friends, over the new documentaries, and suddenly, three were banned, though the series was supposed to run for nine years.

The Men Who Killed Kennedy 7 of 9 - The Smoking Guns

d) Over 50,000 copies--prepaid--were destroyed and money returned, as a board of historians were called together by The History Channel to pronounce the documentaries falsely incriminating of former President Lyndon Johnson, who is clearly indicated as ruthless and involved. However, NONE of the historians met with or conferred with ANY of the witnesses, including Baker, nor did they look at ANY evidence whatsoever. This was the first documentary ever banned by The History Channel, or by anyone, so far as we are aware. In 2007, The History Channel lampooned Baker’s testimony.
e) Nigel Turner was systematically maligned on the Internet and has been incommunicado since 2004.
f) Baker was systematically maligned on the internet with big, impressive websites against her, and with newsgroup posts creating lies (such as that Baker claimed to be of Russian nobility, or that she said she was offered $600,000 for her story by a tabloid, or that she was a close friend of Dr. Suess, that Liberace learned how to play the piano on her father’s piano, and other ridiculous statements ‘proving’ she was non-credible!). Other statements claiming to be Baker’s flooded newsgroups, ruining her reputation. Arrest threats, job loss, and death threats began to plague her life.

The Men Who Killed Kennedy 9 of 9 - The Guilty Men

Reason #9: Wealthy Dutch researcher and film producer Wim Dankbaar investigated Baker and her witnesses for six years and fully supports her testimony and story.

a) Dankbaar provides DVDs of Baker and her witnessess’ statements and their stories on his website.
b) Dankbaar twice tried to produce a movie about Baker’s story, but was stopped the first time by a contract by a co-producer (Woods) who demanded Baker’s lifetime story rights, and the second time by a specious lawsuit by Robert Vernon, who stole evidence and spread lies about Dankbaar and Baker on the Internet. Vernon also distributed pornography about Baker and urged potential witnesses not to talk to Baker or Dankbaar. Important corroborating evidence, such as phone call records and films, have now vanished. Some witnesses were threatened and lost their jobs. Baker was hit twice by vehicles in Dallas.

Reason #10: Famed Dutch investigator Peter DeVries, noted for uncovering political crimes and frauds, and solving murder cases, investigated Baker in 2005-2006.

a) DeVries fully supported Baker’s testimony and story in an internationally televised miniseries shown across Europe in 2006.
b) DeVries recently uncovered new evidence in the Aruba murder case famed in the US, using secret cameras and microphones, uncovering a confession no one else was able to obtain.

Reason #11: CBS’s Sixty Minutes investigated Baker’s testimony and story for eighteen months and nearly filmed it three times. They called it their “longest and most expensive investigation” in their entire history. But an insider told Baker that (now disgraced, for lying about Bush) higher-up Dan Rather closed the investigation. “The door was slammed shut in our faces,” according to Sixty Minutes’ founder, Don Hewitt, explaining the problem to C-Span. “I brought that woman in to New York!” he stated. Hewitt called the story the most important story in Sixty Minutes’ history. Emails from Sixty Minutes producer Phil Sheffler state “we did not walk away from this story.”

a) When the investigation closed, Sixty Minutes had not yet interviewed Baker’s living witnesses!
b) Sixty Minutes was advised by Brian Duffy of US News & World Report to drop the investigation because there was ‘not enough evidence.’ Duffy was later found to have written a large article for USN&WR supporting Gerald Posner’s ‘Case Closed’ (Oswald-did-it) book–-a big embarrassment to Duffy if Baker’s story became known to the general public. Duffy had just been re-hired by USN&WR and would later become a chief editor there.
c) Sixty Minutes’ chief source to check Baker’s reliability, Howard Liebengood, had been privy to all CIA and MKULTRA documents gathered by the HSCA, and was a renowned and trusted specialist in the Kennedy assassination. Liebengood confirmed Baker’s knowledge in general, and also her knowledge, specifically, of secret MKULTRA documents they had both seen, in front of CBS producers, Dr. Howard Platzman, and Baker. He urged CBS to film Baker.
d) Liebengood died of a sudden and unexpected heart attack just a few days after retiring, and just before his promise to help Baker’s story get filmed by Sixty Minutes.

Reason #12: More evidence and witnesses: At the time of the Sixty Minutes’ investigation, Baker did not know what evidence was important. She had avoided all contact with the case for three and a half decades. Only after she was allowed to look at records in the case was she able to recognize what evidence she possessed that was important, such as the American Express money order, and Oswald’s time cards, which she had initialed.

a) Baker kept evidence from 1960-1964 concerning her cancer research, her relationship with Oswald, and the events in her life immediately before and after his death, much of which her family saw (such as Reily check stubs) without realizing what was important and what was not. The collection of evidence was finally placed in twelve 50-page books. Baker did not save anything but family photos and an occasional item from any other year. The mass of materials from this time period is rich and detailed.
b) break-ins, robberies, and even kidnapping has resulted in the loss of some evidence, but all of it has been seen and photographed numerous times, and has been successfully linked to Oswald’s activities.
c) new witnesses such as William Livesay (confirms secret medical experiments in 1963 were going on at Jackson hospital using Angola prison volunteers), Edwin Lea McGeHee, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Kelly Thomas, Mary Ferrell (gray Russian book unknown to public and a unique possession of Oswald’s, described by Judyth to Ferrell in front of witnesses), and many others confirm previously unknown details Baker has given.
d) Baker described Bobby Kennedy’s involvement with Guy Banister and knowledge of Oswald, divorce plans of Oswald, details about Oswald’s Mexico City visit which were later confirmed by new witnesses.

One of Oliver Stone's key conspirators in JFK is New Orleans private investigator and former FBI agent Guy Banister.

e) Baker’s presence in a car with Oswald in Jackson (by two different witnesses of repute), and Baker’s explanation of the Clinton matter (which for the first time logically places Oswald, David Ferrie, and Clay Shaw together as seen by–-but unable to be explained by–-eight disparate witnesses in Clinton, Louisiana), where a black Cadillac sat for five hours for no known reason (however, Baker’s testimony clears up the matter, with additional new evidence from the Clay Shaw Grand Jury testimonies finally released to the internet) (see the banned documentary, The Love Affair).

Reason #13: Dr. John Williams, a US professor with a doctorate in statistics, collected data and statistics about the confluences and evidence Baker has presented, with the help of witness Kelly Thomas Cousins, and produced an analysis of events indicating that the chances that Baker and Oswald knew each other intimately are 99%.

1032 Marengo St. Baker lived here in 1963, close to Oswald.

a) Dr. Williams also produced a statistical study indicating that there was only one chance in a MILLION that Oswald and Baker did NOT have prearranged jobs with Reily.
b) Dr. Williams has now published two technical papers in The Dealey Plaza Echo which publishes journal style papers on the JFK/RFK/MLK assassinations in Great Britain.

Reason #14: Why is Baker's life being threatened? She is currently in hiding in a Scandinavian country under EU political asylum rules and regulations due to denigrating Internet and television productions, break-ins, robberies, burglaries, Internet stalking, persecution, live stalking, arrest threats, and death threats.

a) Baker’s book has twice gone to print without her permission, with changes and excisions.
b) Baker wants the REAL book to get published, and will support and authorize its sales.
c) Baker will not return to the United States until after the book is published: she is willing to risk her life to promote the book.
d) “If I had said Oswald DID IT, today I’d be a rich woman, instead of in hiding, fearing for my life.” (JVB) The book is true. It’s relevant, pointing to Oswald’s innocence and indicating a Coup d’etat.

Monday, 8 March 2010

"The 'magic bullet' theory and a coup d’etat in America" By Jerry Mazza

The ‘magic bullet’ theory and a coup d’etat in America
Jerry Mazza / 8 March 2010

Whether you know it or not, the “magic bullet” theory is the critical keystone of the US Government’s claim that a “lone gunman,” Lee Harvey Oswald, assassinated President John F. Kennedy. This theory has been conclusively proven false as of November, 2009, with the publication of Reasoning about Assassinations, by Dr. James Fetzer, based upon research by a team of experts.

Fetzer explains why the "magic bullet" theory, the foundation for THE WARREN REPORT (1964), THE HSCA FINAL REPORT (1979), and Gerald Posner's CASE CLOSED (1993), is false

After all, it was the acceptance of this unbelievable theory that literally paved the way for a coup d’etat of America. That is, if you can assassinate a president in broad daylight in a major American city by deploying an elaborate set of lies and get away with it, what and who is left that is not within the province of US government intelligence agencies and cohorts to destroy?

In its wake, JFK’s assassination was the beginning of a new era of pessimism about the US government, including its Vietnam War, ongoing at that time, a war that JFK wished to withdraw from. Shortly after JFK’s death, his timetable for a complete withdrawal was reversed by Lyndon Johnson and all the stops for additional mass murders were removed.

It was the “magic bullet” theory that gave the Warren Commission and subsequently much of America “permission to believe” that Oswald could amazingly aim and fire three shots from his bolt-action, Italian Army rifle, within a mere six seconds and hit JFK in the back and then in the head. One of the shots missed the targets entirely, hitting a sidewalk and sending a piece of concrete into the face of a distant bystander, who received a small scar from it. This is a matter of record.

Destroying the Single Bullet Theory

That left only two shots, as it turns out, that had to have hit JFK twice. Even though the FBI and the Secret Service had concluded there were three shots and three hits—JFK in the back, Connally in the back, and JFK in the head—the miss that hit bystander James Tague dictated that they had to account for all those wounds based upon the only shot they had available—the one that hit JFK in the back. Where that shot actually hit is the lynchpin that refutes the “magic bullet” theory.

There are several side factors to consider as well. One is that the route of a presidential motorcade in any US city has to be completely scrutinized and made safe at some point before any visit. Open or blackened windows of buildings, open rooftops, any anomalies that provide opportunities for shooters need to be checked out and cleared for safety by local Army Intelligence working with local police departments well before the visit.

In Dallas, in relation to the Dallas motorcade on November 22, 1963, a presidential route that had been set in stone was changed three days in advance. The new route required the presidential motorcade to turn right off of Main Street onto Houston Street, travel north one block, then making a sharp left northwest onto Elm Street, which led downward into Dealey Plaza, the Plaza of the Condors.

Astonishingly enough, as events played out, some sixty eye-witnesses would report that the limousine either dramatically slowed or came to an actual halt after shots had been fired. It was only after the shooting that it sped away to Parkland Hospital.

The Magic Bullet

As Fetzer, in his explosive article, observes, “Everyone has heard of the ‘magic bullet’, which is the lynch-pin of the official account of the assassination of JFK presented by the Warren Commission. As Michael Baden, M.D., who chaired the medical panel for the House Select Committee on Assassinations when it reinvestigated the case in 1977-78 remarked on the 40th observance of his death, if the ‘magic bullet’ theory is false, then there had to have been at least six shots from at least three directions.”

The Great Zapruder Film Hoax: Photo analyst Jack White demonstrates that the famous 8mm film has been faked

This study, based on a presentation made at Cambridge and published by a peer-reviewed international journal, demonstrates that, not only is the “magic bullet” theory false, but, based upon research reported in his three books on the assassination, JFK had a wound to the throat and another to his back and two hits to his head” [which alone makes four shots, theoretically the end of the story].

In addition “Connally had an entry wound in his back, [a fifth shot?]. He had a broken rib, an exit wound in his chest [its result?], a wound to his right wrist [a sixth shot or still the same bullet changing trajectories?] and a bullet fragment embedded in his left thigh [from where? another shot?]. This is essential to understanding the outlandishness of its creator’s claims.

Since JFK had wounds from shots fired from in front and from behind, while John Connally had at least one hit from the side, and while another shot missed and injured James Tague, then there were at least six shots from at least three directions.

Thus, the magic bullet” theory is the weakest link in the entire chain of events in the assassination. Break that link and you break the government’s elaborate chain of events into pure fraud. It’s worth a closer look.

The creator of the “magic bullet” theory, Arlen Specter, a Republican Congressional Aide in 1963, is still around now as a senior Democratic Senator, celebrating a long, hearty if nefarious career. His theory posed that the single “magic bullet” “entered the base of the back of the President’s neck, transited his neck without hitting any bony structures, exited his throat right at the knot of his tie, then [and hold your breath for this] entered John Connelly’s back, shattering a rib, exiting from his chest, damaging his right wrist and then entered his left thigh, where the bullet was alleged to have performed all these feats and nevertheless [was] found in virtually pristine condition. The purported third shot that found its mark was said to have hit JFK’s head and killed him. Yet, we still have the nagging reality of the bystander who received a facial scar from the chip of concrete the slug of the first, missed shot kicked up.

JFK assassination: Secret Service Standdown

Read that paragraph again and try to process these forensic gymnastics and believe that the journey of Specter’s “magic bullet” could possibly be real. I say this because, as Fetzer reports, “When the official account…The Warren Report (1964), appeared, many readers were fascinated to discover that, no matter how implausible it might appear, the ‘magic bullet’ hypothesis was the core of the government’s case.”

Again, the cartoon-like journey of this zig- zagging “magic bullet” remained the keystone of the government case through repeated reinvestigations of the assassination by the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) during 1976-77, and even in more recent books, most notably Gerald Posner’s Case Closed, a bit of government wishful thinking. Although with the government, wishing can make things so.

The Warren Report (1964) published diagrams that JFK had purportedly sustained showed “a hit to the base of the back of the neck and a hit to the back of the head,” which Fetzer observes, allegedly killed him. He added, “The ‘magic bullet’ theory would be false if the bullet had not entered the base of the back of the President’s neck, if it had not transited his neck without hitting any bony structures, or if it had not exited from his neck at the level of the knot of his tie,” as the official tale is told. So they’re stuck with proving their own lies.

What’s not usually known by lay people is that Navy physicians who conducted the autopsy at Bethesda did not dissect the victim’s neck to find out whether the trajectory this bullet purportedly took was actually true. They arrived at it by “inference”. Why would you “infer” the path of a bullet that could be asserted through dissection? You do the surgery and say yes or no. We are talking about the life and death of a beloved United States President.

Because that work wasn’t done, we get this fuzzy language, that the “second wound presumably of entry [italics mine] is that described above in the upper posterior thorax…. The missile path through the fascia and musculature cannot be easily probed. [Why?] The wound presumably of exit was that described by Dr. Malcolm Perry in the low anterior cervical region. That sounds more like a lawyer’s language than a doctor’s.

So the entrance and exit locations are not facts but matters of “presumption”. Commander James Humes, US Navy Medical Corps, stood by and defended these presumptions on the basis of “inference.” And these inferences were drawn after JFK’s body “had been moved from the morgue for preparation for burial and the official state funeral.” Yet, based on conversations with doctors from Parkland Hospital (the original hospital Kennedy was taken to after being hit), Humes “belatedly realized that the wound to the back must have been the entry point for the wound to the throat as its point of exit!”

And notice too that the official description of ‘the upper right posterior thorax,’ which is the upper-right portion of the chest cavity, does not quite place the wound where it has to be if the ‘magic bullet’ hypothesis were true. Even Gerald Posner’s diagram from Case Closed—included in Fetzer’s article, does not accord with the official account. Just look for yourself!

Contradicting Evidence

A different diagram of the Bethesda autopsy was made by FBI Agent James W. Silbert, who actually observed the autopsy. It is found in Noel Twyman’s Bloody Treason (1997), page 100, but Fetzer includes it, too. That clearly shows the difficulties that the “magic bullet” hypothesis presents, even in relation to its most basic assumptions, since the wound to the back is too low to be the entry point for a wound that exited the throat, if, as purported, the bullet was fired from above, that is from the sixth floor of the Texas Book Depository, as the official account asserts.

David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph. D., finally demonstrated that no bullet could have entered the President’s neck at the location alleged and exited at the location alleged without impacting cervical vertebrae. Astoundingly, “It doesn’t seem necessary to add that Malcolm Perry, M.D., who performed a tracheostomy in a vain attempt to save the President’s life, described the wound to the throat [and this is absolutely key] not as an exit wound, but as an entry wound, three times during a press conference at Parkland… a report widely broadcast over radio and television that day.”

Dr. David Mantik discusses forgery of the X-rays

Somehow, the Warren Commission never received a copy of that transcript, too difficult to locate, which in essence would clearly seal the fact that President Kennedy was hit from the front, the shot crashing through the center of the windshield into his throat. And this would by definition implicate other shooters facing the limousine from its front, positioned either in Dealey Plaza or around the Triple Underpass beyond.

Parenthetically, the Lincoln limousine with the windshield bullet hole and other evidence was quickly whisked away post assassination to Ford in Detroit where it was totally refurbished at taxpayer’s expense for $1,000,000, even though it was a “crime scene on wheels”. It is a striking image of the loss of openness in our society.

So then, where did that bullet that supposedly hit JFK in the back come from? If it wasn’t at the base of the back of the neck as the “magic bullet” stipulates, then The Warren Report (1993), The HSCA Report (1979), Case Closed (1993) and all other work that takes it for granted—as a presupposition—cannot possibly be true.

It was no less than Gerald Ford, gifted with the presidency years later when Nixon resigned, who, back in 1963 as a member of the Warren Commission, realized that the back wound would need to be “re-described” to make the “magic bullet” theory even remotely plausible. This fact was finally discovered by the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB).

The Zapruder Film: Truth or Deception

Dr. Mantik found a patient with similar neck and chest dimensions to JFK and, using a CAT scan, determined that no bullet could have taken such a trajectory. So the core of official account is not only false and provably false but is not even anatomically possible! So the wounds to JFK’s throat wound and the wounds to John Connally were not inflicted by a lone assassin firing from above and behind but have to have been caused by separate shots and separate shooters.

The truth would have been glaring if not for those in power suppressing evidence by not sending JFK’s blood-stained, bullet-holed shirt and jacket to Bethesda for the physicians to study; also, by not providing transcripts of the “Parkland Press Conference to the Warren Commission and using similar techniques of obfuscation. The process of selection and elimination—selecting evidence that supports a predetermined conclusion, eliminating the rest—is well-known to used-car salesmen, editorial writers and politicians, but especially to those who practice propaganda designed to mislead the public.

Fetzer and his research group have not only proved the falsity of the "magic bullet" theory but have exposed the fraud at the foundation of the government's official account. Among their discoveries are the complementary deceptions that the autopsy X-rays have been fabricated (a) to conceal the massive blow-out to the back of the head that more than forty eyewitnesses reported and (b) to add a 6.5 mm metallic slice in an apparent effort to implicate an obscure World War II Italian Mannlicher-Carcano as the weapon used.

In fact, a world authority on the human brain, Robert B. Livingston, M.D., also concluded that the brain shown in diagrams and photographs held in the National Archives cannot possibly be the brain of JFK. These discoveries had already been made by 1993 (Fetzer 1998).

AMBUSH! - How the Secret Service set up JFK

In spite of Fetzer’s repeated efforts to bring these findings to the attention of the American people (through "ABC Nightly News" and "Nightline") and of the Department of Justice, he had little success, which is perhaps the most important reason I’ve worked with Dr. Fetzer to retell this incredible story.

Where We Stand Today

On the basis of the Fetzer group’s extended research, they have established that JFK was hit at least four times: once in the throat from in front; once in the back from behind; and twice in the head. Connally was hit from one to three times, where at least three shots seem to have missed. A total of eight, nine, or ten shots thus appear to have been fired from six different locations (Fetzer 2000, 2003. For more, see his chapter, “Dealey Plaza Revisited”, which can be downloaded from

As a striking example of how official inquiries by the government have suppressed, even overlooked important evidence, Thomas Evan Robinson, the mortician who prepared the body for burial after the Bethesda autopsy, told Joe West, a private investigator, that JFK had a large gaping hole in the back of his head, a smaller wound in the right temple (which was the entry wound for the blow-out to the back of the head), and a wound to the back about five to six inches below the shoulder and to the right of the back bone.

LBJ's Mistress Blows Whistle On JFK Assassination

That is the location supported by the shirt and the jacket, the autopsy diagram and the FBI sketch, and even the death certification by the president’s personal physicians. He provided this information to West on 26 May 1992, but it obviously could have been available to the Warren Commission anytime it had wanted it. Clearly, that was not something they wanted to hear.

In collaboration with other experts, including John P. Costella, Ph.D., Fetzer, et al have also discovered that the home movie of the assassination, known as "the Zapruder film", has been recreated using sophisticated techniques of optical printing and special effects. The most important reason for doing this was to remove the limo stop from the film, since it was such an obvious indication of Secret Service complicity. Because of "ghost images" that link successive frames, it was necessary to reshoot the film in order that the deception not be readily exposed (Fetzer 2003).

Australian physicist John Costella PhD speaks
about the fabrication of the famous Zapruder film.

Fetzer et al have also discovered more than fifteen indications of Secret Service complicity in setting JFK up for the hit, including failing to weld manhole covers, failure to cover open windows, allowing the crowd to spill over into the street, adopting an improper motorcade route, ordering the vehicles in the wrong sequence, keeping motorcycle patrolmen to the rear of the limousine, bringing the limousine to a halt after bullets began to be fired, washing blood and brains from the limousine at Parkland, taking the autopsy photographs down and completely rebuilt. The probability that these things could have happened "by chance" is, unsurprisingly, vanishingly small (Fetzer 2000, 2002a).

Does that remind you at all of sweeping the evidence away from Ground Zero 38 years later? Giuliani knew he had 30 months (two and a half years) to get the job done, yet he pushed the workers at the expense of their health and even their lives to accomplish the feat in eight months. Almost like rebuilding the limo three days after the assassination. The flavor of corruption is the same in each case.

The conclusions that can be drawn from the authentic JFK evidence are rather profound. The Mafia, which may have put up some of the shooters, could not have extended its reach into Bethesda Naval Hospital to alter X-rays under the control of U.S. Navy medical officers, agents of the Secret Service, or the President's personal physician. Neither pro- nor anti-Castro Cubans could have substituted the brain of someone else for that of JFK during a supplemental autopsy.

Was his demeanor that of a killer? What did he say?
What about his expressions and body language?

Indeed, even if the KGB, like the CIA, had the ability to recreate a film, it could not have obtained a copy of the Zapruder film to alter it. None of these things have been done by Lee Harvey Oswald, who was in jail or already dead. Based upon the scientific principle known as “inference to the best explanation”, it leaves no reasonable doubt that setting up JFK for the hit and altering the evidence to conceal the true causes of his death must have involved elements at the highest levels of the U.S. government.

Jerry Mazza is a freelance writer, life-long resident of New York City. His book “State Of Shock – Poems from 9/11 on” is available at, and


Information about Lee Harvey Oswald and my book, Me & Lee.

Nigel Turner

Nigel Turner
His business card shows a knight in armor on a charging warhorse....