Re: JUDYTH: National Science Foundation scholar****p and grants

On May 18, 10:22=A0am, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Steve Thomas wrote:
> > On May 16, 9:19 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony_ma...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> Michael O'Dell wrote:
> >>> "Anthony Marsh" <anthony_ma...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >>>news:58-dnZu8epy2oLHVnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>> Michael O'Dell wrote:
> >>>>> "Anthony Marsh" <anthony_ma...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >>>>>news:5vKdnflyKvNyBYHVnZ2dnUVZ_rSrnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>>> Michael O'Dell wrote:
> >>>>>>> "Anthony Marsh" <anthony_ma...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>news:M72dnbkdmqlJhobVnZ2dnUVZ_oDinZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>>>>> kbs88...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Apr 30, 10:16 pm, "paul seaton"
<paulNOseatonS...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Howard,
> >>>>>>>>>> First, my cards on the table : I don't believe the
'interesting=
'
> >>>>>>>>>> parts of
> >>>>>>>>>> Judyth's story - I mean her supposed connection to LHO &
Ferrie=
 &
> >>>>>>>>>> all
> >>>>>>>>>> that, though I do think it's clear she was a very bright
studen=
t,
> >>>>>>>>>> and did
> >>>>>>>>>> work at Reilly.
> >>>>>>>>>> Now, what I want to ask you is , what ( aside from JVB's body
> >>>>>>>>>> language )
> >>>>>>>>>> actual hard physical evidence convinces you of the truth of
her=

> >>>>>>>>>> story - ie
> >>>>>>>>>> what -for you - kills the hypothesis that she basically just
ma=
de up
> >>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>> whole JFK connection ?
> >>>>>>>>>> It would be interesting if you could boil your belief down to
a=

> >>>>>>>>>> finite
> >>>>>>>>>> hard core of key facts that swing you in her favour. I should
s=
ay
> >>>>>>>>>> that -
> >>>>>>>>>> in my state of ignorance, not having read her book - I am
under=
 the
> >>>>>>>>>> impression that there are no such facts.
> >>>>>>>>>> Paul S
> >>>>>>>>>> ps: post also cc'ddirect to Howard
> >>>>>>>>> I just wanted to jump in here for a second to say that I
really =
am
> >>>>>>>>> enjoying all of these JUDYTH threads. I've only made a few
posts=
 in
> >>>>>>>>> the JFK group but have read a lot of the information here. The
r=
eason
> >>>>>>>>> the JUDYTH threads are so interesting to me is that they cover
a=

> >>>>>>>>> recent addition to the JFK saga. The books you see on
Amazon.com=

> >>>>>>>>> cover parts of the assassination that have been gone over with
a=
 fine
> >>>>>>>>> tooth comb for years. However, the investigative work that
Barb =
is
> >>>>>>>>> doing is up to the minute new information and it's great to
see =
all
> >>>>>>>>> the correspondence unfold. I just want to say thanks to Barb
for=

> >>>>>>>>> going through all the trouble to get to the truth (whether it
> >>>>>>>>> sup****ts or damages Judyth's story) and placing it on a public
f=
orum
> >>>>>>>>> for critical review.
> >>>>>>>> Except for the fact that Barb's only agenda is to attack Judyth
a=
t all
> >>>>>>>> costs.
> >>>>>>> Now Tony, I was hoping you'd stop tarni****ng your image by make
su=
ch
> >>>>>>> silly statements.
> >>>>>>> Barb's motive doesn't matter. =A0The truth matters. =A0If her
sole=
 motive
> >>>>>>> was to dig up dirt, the dirt would still have to be there to be
du=
g up.
> >>>>>>> What matters is if the dirt exists, not the motivation of the
pers=
on
> >>>>>>> who finds it.
> >>>>>> Her motive does matter. If there are 100 points, she looks into
onl=
y
> >>>>>> those points where she can dig up dirt and re****ts that 100% of
the=

> >>>>>> points she checked out are bogus, but that could be only 35 of
the =
100
> >>>>>> points.
> >>>>> Purely your fantasizing. =A0She hasn't looked into only those
points=
 where
> >>>>> she can dig up dirt. =A0She has clearly looked into those points
whe=
re
> >>>>> something might still be do***ented.
> >>>> She did not look for the letter to President Kennedy. Guess there's
n=
o
> >>>> dirt there.
> >>> Couple of points you have persistently missed.
> >>> The letter is not a material part of the story. =A0Having or not
havin=
g a
> >>> copy of it changed nothing. =A0If I recall, she said she wrote a
lette=
r, and
> >>> had a reply. =A0The reply is pretty much proof that she wrote the
lett=
er, so
> >>> its existence was not in question.
> >> You seem to have missed the point. Judyth's attackers claim that she
> >> lied about everything. I proved that is not true.
>
> > =A0 Wrong again Marsh, she lied about the letter.
>
> She did not lie about the fact that she wrote the letter.



   Sure she did, she claimd it was written for a specific reason, turns 
out it was a basic teenage fan letter. You should read it again and then 
see what she says about it in her book. Then mabey you'll be up to speed 
and know she lied about the letter.




>
>
>
>
>
> >> She did not just
> >> fantasize about writing to President Kennedy. I found the actual
letter=
..
> >> She could not. Martin could not. You could not. Bard could not.
>
> >>> However, having gotten the letter from the JFK library, it did not
sup=
****t
> >>> Judyth's version of events. =A0Call that "dirt" if you like, you
recov=
ered
> >>> the "dirt". =A0The content of the letter did not say what Judyth
said =
it
> >>> did, and it was not written when she said it was.
> >> Not dirt.
>
> >>> The thing is, if you research a story and the story is not entirely
tr=
ue,
> >>> you are likely to find things you call "dirt". =A0But that's the
natur=
e of
> >>> the beast. =A0If it's a true story there won't be "dirt". =A0Your
cirt=
icism of
> >>> Barb for finding "dirt" is illogical. =A0But you know that, at least
i=
n
> >>> other contexts.
> >> The point is the common CIA tactic of attacking the credibility of
the
> >> source rather than deal with the facts.
>
> >>> Michael- Hide quoted text -
> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -