+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Poking More Holes in Judyth Baker (/showthread.php?tid=13898)
Poking More Holes in Judyth Baker - Albert Doyle - 05-08-2015
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:AD: Very important. If you read JVB's response she now admits she believes there was an Oswald double.
​How is anything she says "very important"?
I guess in the way that she is hanging herself with the obvious flaws in her Oswald Mexico City accounts. She doesn't seem to grasp that the Oswald Silvia Duran insisted she saw was the short curly haired non-Lee. Baker tries to say the context of Duran is that she lied about seeing Lee in order to avoid admitting an affair because she was married (as if the CIA torture brought her around to the truth). But that's not the correct order or how it happened. The true context is Duran refused to say it was Lee and was jailed by CIA until she finally changed her story and admitted it was Lee. Which means Oswald never went to the Consulate, which means he couldn't have described the goings-on at the Consulate as Baker claimed. The real context is Duran saw an obvious impostor. Which also means Lee could not have possibly described this Consulate experience as she claims. In her classic way Baker is trying to wiggle in the suggestion that Duran did see Lee in the Consulate and later was forced to tell the truth by CIA torture. That also makes Baker uncredible because that really stands the truth on its head.
David has done good work.
Poking More Holes in Judyth Baker - Albert Doyle - 05-08-2015
David Josephs Wrote:the only thing this corroborates is that HARVEY did not go to Mexico and even then very loosely.
As for a double... The man Duran and Azcue say presented himself as Oswald was NOT, repeat NOT the man Ruby shot - per there own testimony. and Did not return after the afternoon of Sept 27.
I agree. I meant to add that before but was in a hurry. So Baker now officially believes in a double but not necessarily the H&L double. Obviously if the Oswald Duran witnessed was one of the H&L doubles she would have had trouble distinguishing.
Poking More Holes in Judyth Baker - David Josephs - 05-08-2015
Albert Doyle Wrote:Jim DiEugenio Wrote:AD: Very important. If you read JVB's response she now admits she believes there was an Oswald double.
​How is anything she says "very important"?
I guess in the way that she is hanging herself with the obvious flaws in her Oswald Mexico City accounts. She doesn't seem to grasp that the Oswald Silvia Duran insisted she saw was the short curly haired non-Lee. Baker tries to say the context of Duran is that she lied about seeing Lee in order to avoid admitting an affair because she was married (as if the CIA torture brought her around to the truth). But that's not the correct order or how it happened. The true context is Duran refused to say it was Lee and was jailed by CIA until she finally changed her story and admitted it was Lee. Which means Oswald never went to the Consulate, which means he couldn't have described the goings-on at the Consulate as Baker claimed. The real context is Duran saw an obvious impostor. Which also means Lee could not have possibly described this Consulate experience as she claims.
David has done good work.
Thanks Albert...
Baker's stories, like Von Pein's posts cannot be corroborated or authenticated. In fact, when anyone looks at the evidence, it actually proves the opposite of the conclusions offered.
One has to wonder - if they knew at 7am on 11/24 that he had traveled by car... how could they know if 3 days later they claim all records negative since 1959...
::face.palm:: ;;okay::
btw - Duran was interrogated by the Mexican DFS, not the CIA. The CIA "suggested" they interrogate her.
From what I've read there was not torture... they shook her up a bit, grabbed her arms which bruised, but this was not waterboarding at Guantanamo...
The word of Elena Garro de Paz was what put Duran under the gun. Notice the date of her interview... 2 months after the report is published.
CORNWELL - Did you ever receive any indication from them that any of them had ever had a contact with Oswald?
TIRADO - No.
CORNWELL - Did Elena or Elinita Garro do Paz ever come to those parties? In your home?
TIRADO - No.
"Failed to substantiate"... she lied to the CIA/DFS about information that incriminates Oswald and is simply dropped... no reprocussion... just like Alvarado.
Poking More Holes in Judyth Baker - Albert Doyle - 06-08-2015
JVB reacted on her Facebook page saying the accusations against her about lying about Mexico were false. Funny, the Facebook page entry she made on this did not have any comments option. Why did Judyth lock out any comments on this subject? What was Judyth worried about that she disabled comments?
Judyth claims that Lee came back from Mexico and explained the Cuban Consulate visit in detail, including descriptions of Silvia Duran. But history is showing that Oswald never visited the Consulate. Instead Duran said a shorter man with curly blond hair claimed to be Oswald on that visit. In fact CIA got the Mexican police to jail Duran because she would not say it was Oswald who visited the Consulate.
Surely if the real Oswald did visit the Consulate I doubt the CIA cameras would have failed.
In her Facebook response JVB said this was all simple to explain. That Duran didn't want to admit she witnessed Oswald because the two had an affair at a twist party in Mexico during the visit, and since Duran was married she didn't want people to know. But this response is yet another good example of JVB's fabricated excuse-making because why would a Consulate visit expose a sexual relationship that happened elsewhere? Not only that but Oswald was allegedly witnessed by Ascue at the Consulate so lying about it would only bring more attention to Duran.
Furthermore Baker says Lee was ordered to Mexico but the mission was called off. But, if we look at the record Baker is backing, the mission wasn't called off. Indeed she is claiming Oswald went to the Consulate. Also, the record shows Oswald stayed for a week and performed many attempts at getting visas. He stayed long enough for the twist party according to Baker. So if the mission was called off why doesn't Baker give more detail on when it was cut off and how it relates to this alleged account she provides. Smart researchers will see that Baker provides nothing more than what is available from books. If indeed she was as on the inside as she claims you would think there would be more corroborating exclusive information? Specific details of the cut-off time and how it affected the mission. No, instead we are offered these conflicting generalities that Baker conspicuously makes no attempt to answer. Hers is just a flow of rhetoric that doesn't really answer what needs to be answered. Duran's excuse that she didn't want to reveal a relationship with a presidential assassin differs from not wanting to admit an affair because she was married. It was obviously the cover story she used to prevent having to admit she was tortured away from her original account.
If the original tale wasn't evidence enough of JVB's story-telling her childish excuse that Duran was trying to hide an affair should be. JVB is obviously making up excuses as she goes along after being caught and they aren't very good ones. It is clear that Duran was jailed because she refused to back off her witnessing of an Oswald impostor. JVB's excuses aren't working and her Mexico tale is a good barometer of her credibility.
.
Poking More Holes in Judyth Baker - Albert Doyle - 06-08-2015
Drew Phipps Wrote:Just curious why you would assume the moniker of an at least "partly-discredited-by-virtue-of-insanity" eyewitness to the Oswald double story. That strikes me as callous. Wasn't the use of the Ralph Yates name the topic of some other seemingly pointless post in the recent past? What are you up to?
Yates is only discredited if you believe the word of the FBI in its Kennedy assassination investigation.
Honestly, if we look at FBI's behavior in its investigation it lied, corrupted evidence, operated with the intent to enforce a cover up, and very likely participated in killing witnesses. What you are saying is take their word on Yates who otherwise, by comparison, actually comes up much better as far as credibility than FBI.
Yates wasn't at all insane. Any claims of insanity concerning Yates come after the FBI forced his breakdown by denying his witnessing and making Yates reconsider his understanding of reality where he previously thought FBI would react honestly to evidence.
No, Yates was telling the truth as his FBI polygraph showed. The positive outcome of that test included Yates confirming that he had seen the backyard photo. I assume the photo the hitch-hiker showed Yates was one of the backyard photos. The backyard photo showed Lee Harvey Oswald's face. Yates passed a lie detector test where he claimed the hitch-hiker, the man in the photo, and the man shown on TV after the assassination were all the same person.
Why do you doubters accept the FBI's word when they are trying to destroy Yates but then don't accept it when it backs him? Practicers of Deep Political analysis should know that what is written in FBI reports is not nearly as valuable as what isn't. When the FBI man told Dorothy Yates that Ralph had passed the test that is the most meaningful evidence here and speaks the most. It exonerates Yates and shows he wasn't insane. Certainly not at FBI's word.
Poking More Holes in Judyth Baker - Tom Scully - 06-08-2015
Drew Phipps Wrote:So Albert, you admit posting on that other site under the name of "Ralph Yates"? Just curious why you would assume the moniker of an at least "partly-discredited-by-virtue-of-insanity" eyewitness to the Oswald double story. That strikes me as callous. Wasn't the use of the Ralph Yates name the topic of some other seemingly pointless post in the recent past? What are you up to?
PS: I don't believe JVB's story in the slightest, and if there are doubles showing up around here, she's one of them, according to her sometime-defender Edward Haslam...
Albert Doyle Wrote:Drew Phipps Wrote:Just curious why you would assume the moniker of an at least "partly-discredited-by-virtue-of-insanity" eyewitness to the Oswald double story. That strikes me as callous. Wasn't the use of the Ralph Yates name the topic of some other seemingly pointless post in the recent past? What are you up to?
Yates is only discredited if you believe the word of the FBI in its Kennedy assassination investigation.......
Quote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)Wikipedia
A sockpuppet is an online identity used for purposes of deception. The term, a reference to the manipulation of a simple hand puppet made from a sock, ...
Tom Scully Wrote:Magda Hassan Wrote:Tom I'm finding your posting this Amazon Hendrix thing confusing. What are you trying to say? Yes there is another Amazon reviewer called Ralph Yates but what relevance is this to what is discussed here?
I am a researcher. I like to know who I am dealing with. It could be coincidental that three people are actually one person, but this seems extremely unlikely.
I posted the obit of an individual who matched the description of the Amazon profile of an individual of Sanibel, FL who had this name and this interest. This Amazon profile engaged in discussion, as I linked and excerpted above, with a Ralph Yates amazon profile, and the Ralph Yates amazon profile also engaged with my Amazon profile, repeatedly, as I also linked and excerpted in my post, above.
I hope you will agree that it goes well beyond a friendly back and forth, here, on the topic of the reliability of the claims of Ralph Yates, if Yates's most enthusiastic supporter in this thread is also using the name Ralph Yates as an amazon profile sock puppet engaged in discussion with the amazon profile that matches the name and town of residence of a deceased person, as well as the name of the ardent Yates supporter here in this thread.
Albert Doyle Wrote:The evidence is even more overwhelming for Jimi Hendrix's murder. It was simply never investigated by the British Government.
You have to figure that since Jimi Hendrix was high on the list of the Huston Plan's "Security Index" that he fell squarely in to the crosshairs of COINTELPRO's gunsights. One has to imagine, and figure it safe to assume, that when Jimi Hendrix called his New York doctor to discuss his insomnia that CIA was listening-in on the international phone call. So there would be good reason to assume they knew he intended to take the extra-powerful Vesparax that were subtly placed into Monika's flat.
More curious, if we look into Jimi's German girlfriend Monika Dannemann she has a very suspicious background no one is very sure of. For instance she only dated black musicians in Germany before she met Hendrix. In the 1960's it was still considered a psychological abnormality for a white German girl to only like black men. Was Dannemann being groomed for Hendrix as an intelligence infiltrator?
Hendrix took a lot of LSD. If you know about the bizarre programs CIA was involved with back then they involved some very far-out, cutting-edge fringe psy-ops type operations involving drug-induced mind-control etc....
I look for patterns. I've supported this one. Amazon profile, "Ralph Yates" is engaged in discussion (in my post above) with Amazon profile, "Albert Doyle of Sanibel," in a discussion (four months after the date of the obituary of a man matching that description, whose survivors are named in that obit....) of a book titled, [URL="http://www.amazon.com/review/R7U5WM5R54DLG/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm"]Double Witness: The Murder Of Jimi Hendrix
[/URL]
Magda, I do not like to made sport of, and I've supported my claim that I am being made sport of in this thread. Please reread my last post and consider that my presentation in'
these two posts indicates there is no living person with the name and description of the individual engaging the "Ralph Yates" amazon profile, yet there the "two of them are," chattering on about the late Mr. Hendrix......
Albert Regan Doyle - Sanibel-Captiva Islander
Feb 5, 2014 - Albert, the son of William and Gertrude Maye Doyle, attended...
... Special thanks to Albert's son Brian who provided care for him at home....
Magda, I hope you'll consider whether or not you are directing your questions to the person who can explain all of this. I'll debate cordially with anyone, but I think it goes beyond the pale if someone involved in the discussion here is so committed to the rather obscure informant to the FBI, Ralph Yates, that it has led to creation of an Amazon profile displayed in
discussion of the mysterious death of Hendrix, with an Amazon profile matching the description of a person known to have been deceased at the time. Since I've put my time into this thread, "discussing" Ralph Yates's veracity, the rest of "this" has become my business.
Two posts back, I linked to a page supporting everything I have presented in this and in my last post.:
CROWDED HOUSE: RALPH YATES RELOADED
![[Image: OfSanibel.jpg]](http://jfk.education/images/OfSanibel.jpg)
......
Poking More Holes in Judyth Baker - Miles Scull - 06-08-2015
Albert Doyle Wrote:Drew Phipps Wrote:Just curious why you would assume the moniker of an at least "partly-discredited-by-virtue-of-insanity" eyewitness to the Oswald double story. That strikes me as callous. Wasn't the use of the Ralph Yates name the topic of some other seemingly pointless post in the recent past? What are you up to?
Yates is only discredited if you believe the word of the FBI in its Kennedy assassination investigation.
Honestly, if we look at FBI's behavior in its investigation it lied, corrupted evidence, operated with the intent to enforce a cover up, and very likely participated in killing witnesses. What you are saying is take their word on Yates who otherwise, by comparison, actually comes up much better as far as credibility than FBI.
Yates wasn't at all insane. Any claims of insanity concerning Yates come after the FBI forced his breakdown by denying his witnessing and making Yates reconsider his understanding of reality where he previously thought FBI would react honestly to evidence.
No, Yates was telling the truth as his FBI polygraph showed. The positive outcome of that test included Yates confirming that he had seen the backyard photo. I assume the photo the hitch-hiker showed Yates was one of the backyard photos. The backyard photo showed Lee Harvey Oswald's face. Yates passed a lie detector test where he claimed the hitch-hiker, the man in the photo, and the man shown on TV after the assassination were all the same person.
Why do you doubters accept the FBI's word when they are trying to destroy Yates but then don't accept it when it backs him? Practicers of Deep Political analysis should know that what is written in FBI reports is not nearly as valuable as what isn't. When the FBI man told Dorothy Yates that Ralph had passed the test that is the most meaningful evidence here and speaks the most. It exonerates Yates and shows he wasn't insane. Certainly not at FBI's word.
Concerning Yates, how is it logical to assume as likely or plausible that Yates would have concocted his elaborate falsehood to tell the FBI on Nov. 26th based on information Yates learned on Nov. 24th (or 25th?) from the Wade evening news conference of Nov. 24th? That's one day Yates had to formulate his complex lie. Further, there is no evidence that Yates was actually aware of the Wade news conference information.
What motive would Yates have had to thus lie to the FBI? Doing so risked jail, job and his supporting his family (of 5 children, was it?).
To assume this likely is clutching at straws in the extreme.
Poking More Holes in Judyth Baker - Albert Doyle - 06-08-2015
Miles Scull Wrote:To assume this likely is clutching at straws in the extreme.
Yet while offering the weakest case of anybody, based mostly on doubt, the doubters then ignore a passed polygraph that gave the nod to Yates seeing the hitch-hiker as the same guy in the backyard photo, and as the same guy shown on TV after the assassination. That's a confirmation in my book. It doesn't make sense that the polygraph would miss a whopper of a lie like that or the enormous stress involved in this grandiose hoax that ended up getting Yates committed. How could the polygraph give the mental trainwreck the doubters are portraying a pass? The behavior spoken of by FBI was behavior that would be registered on the sensitive sensors of the polygraph.
So far no doubter has answered this short of offering general information on polygraphs that doesn't really specifically apply to what is being argued here. The doubters are saying Yates had the mental ability to defraud the polygraph but didn't have the mental ability to avoid breaking down in front of FBI. That doesn't make sense and doesn't forensically match. What does make sense from all this evidence is that Yates saw what he said he had seen and was telling the truth.
Furthermore Yates rushed in to tell Dempsey Jones of his encounter right it after happened. Jones said Yates wanted to tell him an amazing coincidence happened because a hitch-hiker had initiated the same conversation Yates and Jones had had about shooting Kennedy on his visit with a high powered rifle from an office building. Statistically, once Jones confirmed this witnessing it is much more likely the included details were accurate as well. But this is all moot because Yates passed a lie detector test on his witnessing that the doubters have yet to admit. Also, FBI tried to defame Yates and got Jones to say Yates was a bragger and loudmouth as the opening statement in his testimony.
.
Poking More Holes in Judyth Baker - Albert Doyle - 12-12-2015
Pamela Brown may have stumbled across something important without realizing it. She noted that Judyth Baker's Reily W-2 had a Florida address for Baker's home address. Pamela Brown also asked why were there black dots on Baker's W-2?
The black dots are in the City and State Tax section. The dots are probably blanking-out those columns because there is no State and City tax in Florida. In other words it might be a special form only used for Florida.
I'm not sure but this could be a clue worth pursuing.
.
Poking More Holes in Judyth Baker - Albert Doyle - 15-01-2016
Without endorsing anything Baker writes. For what it is worth here is her latest on Mexico:
" We have several witnesses who reported that Lee Oswald WAS in Mexico City. And at first, the CIA wanted everybody to know that. Later, probably due to emerging dangers of inciting WWIII with Russia or Cuba, denials set in. We have researchers such as Anthony Summers, along with John Armstrong and Mark Lane, saying Lee never went to Mexico Citty. Not so.I have given many details of why he was there, why he suddenly left, and why Lee was so upset when he could not enter Cuba.(though the efforts he made seemed more for drama to prove he 'tried' to filfill the mission, as he told me he had little hope of success from the moment the contact did not show up to pick upo the biological weapon...with its shiort shelf life, in a few days, it was really too late...).
Author H. p. Albarelli has never met me and dismisses me as a witness, but this won't stop me from citing what he has published in "A SECRET ORDER."
He relates the following: "[Charles Thomas, CIA, reported that]...In Sept. 1963...[Elena Garro de paz] went to a party at the home of Ruben Duran, who is married to her cousin. ..There she met Oswald, and two other young Americans who were with him." (p. 347)
Her mother also saw Lee Oswald at the party. Therefore, "[When]...they saw newspapers and the photographs of Oswald ...she {Elena} and her daughter both came to the independent conclusion that he was one of the young Americans at the Duran party." (p. 355)
Charles Thomas went on to report a good reason why his wife Silvia Duran denied that she had an association with Lee: "At the end of Jan. 1964, Ruben Duran visited Sra/ dePaz...He [Duran] said he was going to visit the United States and wanted her to protect him as much as possible whle he was away. He feared that it might be discvered that Oswald had been to his house. Since he {Duran} had been born in the United States, he knew it woukd be easy for the Mexican government to divest him of his citizenship and deport him." (p. 357-358). NOTE: In April 1971, Charles William Thomas "committed suicide" at age 45 -- if you believe the official report that he was a "desperate man" because he was fired from the CIA (with a pension).. He had not been able to be promoted in the CIA ever since his report and was eventually forced to retire. His wife said he would never do such a thing.
Of Thomas, an FBI official, W. A. Branigan, wrote: "Thmas points out to the State Department that if the allegations he has received from Mrs. Paz are true, although they would not prove a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy, they would, if made public, damage the credibility of the Warren Commission. Report." (p. 358)
An FBI report was generated that said since the arty was held the night before on Oct. 1, 1963, and since Lee Harvey Oswald left Mexico City on oct. 2, 1963,, that he could not have attended the party.
Albarelli, in addition, interviewed Robert C. Buick, a notorious bank robber and bullfighter who writes very well, and has his own website that you can visit today. Buick met Lee Oswald and from him learned that JFK was going to be assassinated. Buick culd not really tell if Lee was concerned because he was going to be involved or because he had learned of the plot and felt obliged to mention it to another American. Lee tos me that he did go to a bullring, but he did not mention Buick to me. He only said he was sekeing a contact there. Buick did not meet Lee at a bullring, but, rather, at a bar, but Lee walked right up to him, he said, and asked if he was a bullfighter.
It is rather interesting, what is reported next:
"Robert Clayton Buick,: writes Albarelli, " met Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico City...a note typed by [CIA asset] June Cobb in October 1963...is addressed to 'DP."[Albarelli does not say so, but this may be her friend David phillips, who was Lee's handler, his betrayer, as well as being involved, Lee told me, in the plot to kill Kennedy]. What comes next isinteresting: "The note reads, 'The day after Lo [Lee Oswald] in Comercio, encountered Buick, the American bullfighter, at H. Luma. Warren [Broglie] says Buick is drawing attention here." (p. 419)
By 1966, Buick was indicted in the US for his many bank robberies, "going back to 1963."
NBote that Buick said Lee called himself b the name "Hidell." Lee told me that "Hidell" was 'a project name" and was used by others, not just by him.
(this is not the 'Charles Thomas" who was the relegated Customs Officer. who was flown in from Miami to expedite Lee's passport in only 24 hours.)
(Photo: this impersonator was identified asLee Harve Oswald by the CIA for the FBI... later, they claimed the cameras were not working at exactly the time Lee visited the Cuban Cinsuklate, where this photo was taken...] "
I find it interesting she notes the Oswald "project" with others using the Hidell name (not that Oswald ever told her that).