Discussion:
Judyth in Sweden
(too old to reply)
John McAdams
2008-12-10 22:23:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece

It can be translated here:

http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html

The article says she did *not* get asylum.

.John

--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Dave Reitzes
2008-12-11 00:57:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
Obviously the CIA controls the Swedish media.

Dave

http://www.jfk-online.com/judyth-menu.html
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-11 01:53:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
Indeed it does. And the reporter bothered to actually read and quote
from the board's decision ...

Barb :-)
Post by John McAdams
.John
Martin Shackelford
2008-12-11 14:35:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The first of two.

Martin
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
Indeed it does. And the reporter bothered to actually read and quote
from the board's decision ...
Barb :-)
Post by John McAdams
.John
Martin Shackelford
2008-12-11 14:34:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.

Martin
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2008-12-11 14:38:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 11 Dec 2008 09:34:32 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Then post your evidence, Martin.

Interesting how all the *available* evidence about Judyth shows she is
lying, but somehow there is always (conveniently) *unavailable*
evidence that shows she is telling the truth.

Post a letter from the Swedish government showing she was granted
asylum. Or maybe a news article saying that her appeal was
successful.
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Martin Shackelford
2008-12-12 13:04:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.

Martin
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 09:34:32 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Then post your evidence, Martin.
Interesting how all the *available* evidence about Judyth shows she is
lying, but somehow there is always (conveniently) *unavailable*
evidence that shows she is telling the truth.
Post a letter from the Swedish government showing she was granted
asylum. Or maybe a news article saying that her appeal was
successful.
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2008-12-12 16:34:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12 Dec 2008 08:04:08 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
I'll look forward to seeing it, Martin.

.John

--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-12 20:58:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 09:34:32 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Then post your evidence, Martin.
Interesting how all the *available* evidence about Judyth shows she is
lying, but somehow there is always (conveniently) *unavailable*
evidence that shows she is telling the truth.
Post a letter from the Swedish government showing she was granted
asylum. Or maybe a news article saying that her appeal was
successful.
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2008-12-12 21:37:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put it online, and we can all draw our conclusions.

Some of us might know somebody who speaks Swedish. We might try an
online translation.

But by all means put it online.

.John

--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-13 01:50:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put it online, and we can all draw our conclusions.
I don't know how you can draw conclusions from it without first
translating it.
Post by John McAdams
Some of us might know somebody who speaks Swedish. We might try an
online translation.
Do any of the online translators handle JPG files?
Post by John McAdams
But by all means put it online.
So, will Barb make sure it is spread like wildfire across the InterNet?
Post by John McAdams
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 03:00:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12 Dec 2008 20:50:11 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put it online, and we can all draw our conclusions.
I don't know how you can draw conclusions from it without first
translating it.
translating it is the easy part.

Martin drew conclusions from it without ever seeing it ... and then,
it would seem, didn't bother to translate the obvious one key line
before proclaiming it as proof Judyth's appeal for asylum was granted.

They were calling her to come to their offices to discuss her "journey
home."

I posted it in a new thread.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
Some of us might know somebody who speaks Swedish. We might try an
online translation.
Do any of the online translators handle JPG files?
It's short, Tony ... type a few words, geesh.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
But by all means put it online.
So, will Barb make sure it is spread like wildfire across the InterNet?
Might ask Pam and Martin .... they are the ones that yukked this up
into an issue.

Thanks for putting the doc up, Tony!
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2008-12-13 05:13:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:00:41 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
Just put it online, and we can all draw our conclusions.
I don't know how you can draw conclusions from it without first
translating it.
translating it is the easy part.
Martin drew conclusions from it without ever seeing it ... and then,
it would seem, didn't bother to translate the obvious one key line
before proclaiming it as proof Judyth's appeal for asylum was granted.
Apparently, his "conclusions" were simply what Judyth told him.

I keep wondering what *will* convince Martin that he has been conned!

Will this do it?

I'll bet Judyth has been e-mailing Martin and Pam with her
"explanation" of why the documents doesn't show what she claimed.
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Thanks for putting the doc up, Tony!
I second that. For all Tony's willingness to dog and attack Judyth
critics, he did quickly put the document online.

But was that only because he actually *believed* it vindicated Judyth?

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-12 21:46:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put the document up, Anthony. There are several translators
available, as well as at least one person who can read Swedish.

Why not start a new thread with it?

Barb :-)
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 09:34:32 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Then post your evidence, Martin.
Interesting how all the *available* evidence about Judyth shows she is
lying, but somehow there is always (conveniently) *unavailable*
evidence that shows she is telling the truth.
Post a letter from the Swedish government showing she was granted
asylum. Or maybe a news article saying that her appeal was
successful.
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-13 01:24:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put the document up, Anthony. There are several translators
available, as well as at least one person who can read Swedish.
You can read Swedish? It is in a JPG file so I don't see how any automatic
translator could handle it. I think you'll have to OCR it first.



Loading Image...
Post by John McAdams
Why not start a new thread with it?
Why not tell me what it says precisely?
Post by John McAdams
Barb :-)
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 09:34:32 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Then post your evidence, Martin.
Interesting how all the *available* evidence about Judyth shows she is
lying, but somehow there is always (conveniently) *unavailable*
evidence that shows she is telling the truth.
Post a letter from the Swedish government showing she was granted
asylum. Or maybe a news article saying that her appeal was
successful.
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2008-12-13 01:44:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put the document up, Anthony. There are several translators
available, as well as at least one person who can read Swedish.
You can read Swedish? It is in a JPG file so I don't see how any automatic
translator could handle it. I think you'll have to OCR it first.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/asylum%20letter%20july%202008HandlerDeleted.jpg
Post by John McAdams
Why not start a new thread with it?
Why not tell me what it says precisely?
<Quote on>

Kallelse

Du Kallas till Migrationsverket for att prata om din hemresa

Datum: mandag den 7 juli 2008

Plats: Migrationsverket, Enheten i Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora

Tolk pa engelska ar bokad

Om du inte XXXXX maste du meddela oss sa snart som mojligt pa telefon

<Quote off>

Translated here:

http://translate.google.com/translate_t?hl=en#


<Quote on>

Summons

You called for the appeal to talk about your journey home

Date: Monday, July 7, 2008

Location: The Migration Board, Department of Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora

Interpretation in English, booked

If you do not XXXXX nearest you notify us as soon as possible on the phone

<quote off>

I don't see anything here about her getting asylum.

.John
John McAdams
2008-12-13 01:56:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put the document up, Anthony. There are several translators
available, as well as at least one person who can read Swedish.
You can read Swedish? It is in a JPG file so I don't see how any automatic
translator could handle it. I think you'll have to OCR it first.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/asylum%20letter%20july%202008HandlerDeleted.jpg
Post by John McAdams
Why not start a new thread with it?
Why not tell me what it says precisely?
<Quote on>

Kallelse

Du Kallas till Migrationsverket for att prata om din hemresa

Datum: mandag den 7 juli 2008

Plats: Migrationsverket, Enheten i Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora

Tolk pa engelska ar bokad

Om du inte XXXXX maste du meddela oss sa snart som mojligt pa telefon

<Quote off>

Translated here:

http://translate.google.com/translate_t?hl=en#


<Quote on>

Summons

You called for the appeal to talk about your journey home

Date: Monday, July 7, 2008

Location: The Migration Board, Department of Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora

Interpretation in English, booked

If you do not XXXXX nearest you notify us as soon as possible on the phone

<quote off>

I don't see anything here about her getting asylum.

.John
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 03:03:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12 Dec 2008 20:56:05 -0500, "John McAdams"
Post by John McAdams
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put the document up, Anthony. There are several translators
available, as well as at least one person who can read Swedish.
You can read Swedish? It is in a JPG file so I don't see how any automatic
translator could handle it. I think you'll have to OCR it first.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/asylum%20letter%20july%202008HandlerDeleted.jpg
Post by John McAdams
Why not start a new thread with it?
Why not tell me what it says precisely?
<Quote on>
Kallelse
Du Kallas till Migrationsverket for att prata om din hemresa
Datum: mandag den 7 juli 2008
Plats: Migrationsverket, Enheten i Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora
Tolk pa engelska ar bokad
Om du inte XXXXX maste du meddela oss sa snart som mojligt pa telefon
<Quote off>
http://translate.google.com/translate_t?hl=en#
<Quote on>
Summons
You called for the appeal to talk about your journey home
Date: Monday, July 7, 2008
Location: The Migration Board, Department of Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora
Interpretation in English, booked
If you do not XXXXX nearest you notify us as soon as possible on the phone
<quote off>
I don't see anything here about her getting asylum.
.John
I started a thread with the translation too ... they were calling her
in to discuss her "journey home" ..."hemersa" also translated in
context as "repatriation" ... they were shipping her out.

Barb :-)
John McAdams
2008-12-13 04:33:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:03:06 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
On 12 Dec 2008 20:56:05 -0500, "John McAdams"
Post by John McAdams
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put the document up, Anthony. There are several translators
available, as well as at least one person who can read Swedish.
You can read Swedish? It is in a JPG file so I don't see how any automatic
translator could handle it. I think you'll have to OCR it first.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/asylum%20letter%20july%202008HandlerDeleted.jpg
Post by John McAdams
Why not start a new thread with it?
Why not tell me what it says precisely?
<Quote on>
Kallelse
Du Kallas till Migrationsverket for att prata om din hemresa
Datum: mandag den 7 juli 2008
Plats: Migrationsverket, Enheten i Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora
Tolk pa engelska ar bokad
Om du inte XXXXX maste du meddela oss sa snart som mojligt pa telefon
<Quote off>
http://translate.google.com/translate_t?hl=en#
<Quote on>
Summons
You called for the appeal to talk about your journey home
Date: Monday, July 7, 2008
Location: The Migration Board, Department of Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora
Interpretation in English, booked
If you do not XXXXX nearest you notify us as soon as possible on the phone
<quote off>
I don't see anything here about her getting asylum.
.John
I started a thread with the translation too ... they were calling her
in to discuss her "journey home" ..."hemersa" also translated in
context as "repatriation" ... they were shipping her out.
Interesting. I didn't pick up the "repatriation" alternate
translation. Yes, it does sound like they are shipping her out.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 05:29:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 22:33:40 -0600, John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:03:06 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
On 12 Dec 2008 20:56:05 -0500, "John McAdams"
Post by John McAdams
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put the document up, Anthony. There are several translators
available, as well as at least one person who can read Swedish.
You can read Swedish? It is in a JPG file so I don't see how any automatic
translator could handle it. I think you'll have to OCR it first.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/asylum%20letter%20july%202008HandlerDeleted.jpg
Post by John McAdams
Why not start a new thread with it?
Why not tell me what it says precisely?
<Quote on>
Kallelse
Du Kallas till Migrationsverket for att prata om din hemresa
Datum: mandag den 7 juli 2008
Plats: Migrationsverket, Enheten i Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora
Tolk pa engelska ar bokad
Om du inte XXXXX maste du meddela oss sa snart som mojligt pa telefon
<Quote off>
http://translate.google.com/translate_t?hl=en#
<Quote on>
Summons
You called for the appeal to talk about your journey home
Date: Monday, July 7, 2008
Location: The Migration Board, Department of Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora
Interpretation in English, booked
If you do not XXXXX nearest you notify us as soon as possible on the phone
<quote off>
I don't see anything here about her getting asylum.
.John
I started a thread with the translation too ... they were calling her
in to discuss her "journey home" ..."hemersa" also translated in
context as "repatriation" ... they were shipping her out.
Interesting. I didn't pick up the "repatriation" alternate
translation. Yes, it does sound like they are shipping her out.
I wanted to try more than one translator. Did some of the words here:

http://www.lingo24.com/php/contextrans.php?phrase=hemresa&action=sv-en&submit=Search

"hemresa" turned up both "journey home" and "repatriation."

This fits into what the Swedish fellow told you he learned from the
immigration dept ... he said the appeal was rejected on June 2nd, and
that she left Sweden on July 14th ... one week after this appt calling
her to come in and discuss her "hemresa" .... I hope he can get the
info in writing. Regardless, this document Tony put up for Martin is
NOT a document saying she had been granted asylum as Martin claimed.

I don't think that her not being granted asylum would have them
banning her from the country, so within their laws of entrance and
exit timing for visitors, she probably could be there some of the
time... just like any visitor.

Barb :-)
Post by John McAdams
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2008-12-13 05:38:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:29:56 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
http://www.lingo24.com/php/contextrans.php?phrase=hemresa&action=sv-en&submit=Search
"hemresa" turned up both "journey home" and "repatriation."
This fits into what the Swedish fellow told you he learned from the
immigration dept ... he said the appeal was rejected on June 2nd, and
that she left Sweden on July 14th ... one week after this appt calling
her to come in and discuss her "hemresa" .... I hope he can get the
info in writing. Regardless, this document Tony put up for Martin is
NOT a document saying she had been granted asylum as Martin claimed.
I don't think that her not being granted asylum would have them
banning her from the country, so within their laws of entrance and
exit timing for visitors, she probably could be there some of the
time... just like any visitor.
It could well be that she was alloed to stay while her appeal was
being processed.

And indeed, I don't know how long a tourist visa would extend, or
whether she could get a visa for "research" or some such.

But you are right about the dates. It appears she got the boot a few
weeks after her appeal was turned down.

I assume that there, as here, the bureaucratic wheels can turn slowly.
And it would be humane to give somebody being booted out a few weeks
to make arrangements.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 06:55:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 23:38:52 -0600, John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:29:56 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
http://www.lingo24.com/php/contextrans.php?phrase=hemresa&action=sv-en&submit=Search
"hemresa" turned up both "journey home" and "repatriation."
This fits into what the Swedish fellow told you he learned from the
immigration dept ... he said the appeal was rejected on June 2nd, and
that she left Sweden on July 14th ... one week after this appt calling
her to come in and discuss her "hemresa" .... I hope he can get the
info in writing. Regardless, this document Tony put up for Martin is
NOT a document saying she had been granted asylum as Martin claimed.
I don't think that her not being granted asylum would have them
banning her from the country, so within their laws of entrance and
exit timing for visitors, she probably could be there some of the
time... just like any visitor.
It could well be that she was alloed to stay while her appeal was
being processed.
And indeed, I don't know how long a tourist visa would extend, or
whether she could get a visa for "research" or some such.
But you are right about the dates. It appears she got the boot a few
weeks after her appeal was turned down.
I assume that there, as here, the bureaucratic wheels can turn slowly.
And it would be humane to give somebody being booted out a few weeks
to make arrangements.
.John
They do, did some reading. People are helped out during the asyluml
process .... and they have a department that helps people with
repatriation. Sounds like that is what they wanted to discuss with her
.... arranging her "journey home" ... or wherever else she wanted to
go, I suppose.... somewhere out od Sweden at that point.

Barb :-)
Post by John McAdams
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Martin Shackelford
2008-12-13 20:26:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
She never "got the boot," John--making things up again, I see. Another
assumption lover from way back. By the time the appeal issue came up, she
had gotten a job and was in the process of moving--that explains the short
time period involved.

Martin
Post by John McAdams
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:29:56 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
http://www.lingo24.com/php/contextrans.php?phrase=hemresa&action=sv-en&submit=Search
"hemresa" turned up both "journey home" and "repatriation."
This fits into what the Swedish fellow told you he learned from the
immigration dept ... he said the appeal was rejected on June 2nd, and
that she left Sweden on July 14th ... one week after this appt calling
her to come in and discuss her "hemresa" .... I hope he can get the
info in writing. Regardless, this document Tony put up for Martin is
NOT a document saying she had been granted asylum as Martin claimed.
I don't think that her not being granted asylum would have them
banning her from the country, so within their laws of entrance and
exit timing for visitors, she probably could be there some of the
time... just like any visitor.
It could well be that she was alloed to stay while her appeal was
being processed.
And indeed, I don't know how long a tourist visa would extend, or
whether she could get a visa for "research" or some such.
But you are right about the dates. It appears she got the boot a few
weeks after her appeal was turned down.
I assume that there, as here, the bureaucratic wheels can turn slowly.
And it would be humane to give somebody being booted out a few weeks
to make arrangements.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2008-12-13 20:48:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13 Dec 2008 15:26:10 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
She never "got the boot," John--making things up again, I see. Another
assumption lover from way back. By the time the appeal issue came up, she
had gotten a job and was in the process of moving--that explains the short
time period involved.
When people fail to get asylum, the do indeed get the boot, and Judyth
failed to get asylum.

What is the point of rejecting an asylum request if the person is
going to stay in the country anyway?

Of course it's possible she got lucky and managed to move before she
finally got the boot, but clearly she was not going to be allowed to
stay.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
j***@gmail.com
2008-12-13 22:59:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 15:26:10 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
She never "got the boot," John--making things up again, I see. Another
assumption lover from way back. By the time the appeal issue came up, she
had gotten a job and was in the process of moving--that explains the short
time period involved.
When people fail to get asylum, the do indeed get the boot, and Judyth
failed to get asylum.
What is the point of rejecting an asylum request if the person is
going to stay in the country anyway?
Of course it's possible she got lucky and managed to move before she
finally got the boot, but clearly she was not going to be allowed to
stay.
.John
--------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
McAdams insists on hoisting himself even farther on his own petard.
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-14 00:29:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 15:26:10 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
She never "got the boot," John--making things up again, I see. Another
assumption lover from way back. By the time the appeal issue came up, she
had gotten a job and was in the process of moving--that explains the short
time period involved.
When people fail to get asylum, the do indeed get the boot, and Judyth
failed to get asylum.
What is the point of rejecting an asylum request if the person is
going to stay in the country anyway?
Of course it's possible she got lucky and managed to move before she
finally got the boot, but clearly she was not going to be allowed to
stay.
.John
--------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
McAdams insists on hoisting himself even farther on his own petard.
You don't seem to be able to stop hoisting yourself on nothing but a
bunch of your own made uup nonsense. But do you have to start a new
thread nearly every time? How many new threads of this nonsense have
you started in the last few days.

Geesh.

Be sure and email Judyth and let her know you are personally making
sure her latest claim that failed the verification test front and
center and alive,
John McAdams
2008-12-14 05:06:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 16:29:41 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 15:26:10 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
She never "got the boot," John--making things up again, I see. Another
assumption lover from way back. By the time the appeal issue came up, she
had gotten a job and was in the process of moving--that explains the short
time period involved.
When people fail to get asylum, the do indeed get the boot, and Judyth
failed to get asylum.
What is the point of rejecting an asylum request if the person is
going to stay in the country anyway?
Of course it's possible she got lucky and managed to move before she
finally got the boot, but clearly she was not going to be allowed to
stay.
.John
--------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
McAdams insists on hoisting himself even farther on his own petard.
You don't seem to be able to stop hoisting yourself on nothing but a
bunch of your own made uup nonsense. But do you have to start a new
thread nearly every time? How many new threads of this nonsense have
you started in the last few days.
Geesh.
I've asked for Peter's vote to reject her latest post (not visible
here, or course) that starts a new thread.

I expect I'll get it, since Peter is even less enamored than I am
about new attack threads.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-14 04:51:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 15:26:10 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
She never "got the boot," John--making things up again, I see. Another
assumption lover from way back. By the time the appeal issue came up, she
had gotten a job and was in the process of moving--that explains the short
time period involved.
When people fail to get asylum, the do indeed get the boot, and Judyth
failed to get asylum.
Was Judyth deported? Yes or no? Answer the damn question.
Post by John McAdams
What is the point of rejecting an asylum request if the person is
going to stay in the country anyway?
Of course it's possible she got lucky and managed to move before she
finally got the boot, but clearly she was not going to be allowed to
stay.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Grizzlie Antagonist
2008-12-14 19:00:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 15:26:10 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
She never "got the boot," John--making things up again, I see. Another
assumption lover from way back. By the time the appeal issue came up,
she had gotten a job and was in the process of moving--that explains the
short time period involved.
When people fail to get asylum, the do indeed get the boot, and Judyth
failed to get asylum.
Was Judyth deported? Yes or no? Answer the damn question.
I'm not following this discussion very closely.

But the argument that you seem to be leading up to is that Judyth can hold
her head up high because she was never deported since she left the country
before anyone could deport her.

And that's a little like arguing that Nixon left office honorably because he
resigned before he could be impeached.
--
"Populus me sibilat, at mihi plaudo." ("The people hiss at me, but I am well
satisfied with myself") - Horace, Book 1, Satire 1
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 22:46:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13 Dec 2008 15:26:10 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
She never "got the boot," John--making things up again, I see. Another
assumption lover from way back. By the time the appeal issue came up, she
had gotten a job and was in the process of moving--that explains the short
time period involved.
The appeal had already been denied a month earlier, Martin. All
contact info has been provided. The summons was sent for her to come
in and discuss how she was going to go about leaving ... her "journey
home" ... and a week later she left the country. Whether she already
had a job and planned to leave anyway (good thing because they were
requiring her to leave() is so so so beside the point ... though you
are slugging away now trying to make it a point.

The issue was political asylum. You've claimed for months she was
granted political asylum. Then you said her asylum was rehected, but
she appealed and the appeal was successful and she was given asylum.
Now you are saying she didn't even go thru with the appeal because she
already had a job and plans to leave the country anyway .... nevermind
that the appeal had already been rejected.

Enough is enough. She gave you inaccurate info. Now she's doing the
excuse and re-explanation thing we've seen so many times before. And
you are promoting it and keeping this nonsense alive and at the
forefront....continuing to add your insults on top of it.

Stop.
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by John McAdams
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:29:56 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
http://www.lingo24.com/php/contextrans.php?phrase=hemresa&action=sv-en&submit=Search
"hemresa" turned up both "journey home" and "repatriation."
This fits into what the Swedish fellow told you he learned from the
immigration dept ... he said the appeal was rejected on June 2nd, and
that she left Sweden on July 14th ... one week after this appt calling
her to come in and discuss her "hemresa" .... I hope he can get the
info in writing. Regardless, this document Tony put up for Martin is
NOT a document saying she had been granted asylum as Martin claimed.
I don't think that her not being granted asylum would have them
banning her from the country, so within their laws of entrance and
exit timing for visitors, she probably could be there some of the
time... just like any visitor.
It could well be that she was alloed to stay while her appeal was
being processed.
And indeed, I don't know how long a tourist visa would extend, or
whether she could get a visa for "research" or some such.
But you are right about the dates. It appears she got the boot a few
weeks after her appeal was turned down.
I assume that there, as here, the bureaucratic wheels can turn slowly.
And it would be humane to give somebody being booted out a few weeks
to make arrangements.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Martin Shackelford
2008-12-13 14:33:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The repatriation reference refers to the fact that she had obtained a job
and was already in the process of moving.

Martin
Post by John McAdams
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:03:06 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
On 12 Dec 2008 20:56:05 -0500, "John McAdams"
Post by John McAdams
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put the document up, Anthony. There are several translators
available, as well as at least one person who can read Swedish.
You can read Swedish? It is in a JPG file so I don't see how any automatic
translator could handle it. I think you'll have to OCR it first.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/asylum%20letter%20july%202008HandlerDeleted.jpg
Post by John McAdams
Why not start a new thread with it?
Why not tell me what it says precisely?
<Quote on>
Kallelse
Du Kallas till Migrationsverket for att prata om din hemresa
Datum: mandag den 7 juli 2008
Plats: Migrationsverket, Enheten i Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora
Tolk pa engelska ar bokad
Om du inte XXXXX maste du meddela oss sa snart som mojligt pa telefon
<Quote off>
http://translate.google.com/translate_t?hl=en#
<Quote on>
Summons
You called for the appeal to talk about your journey home
Date: Monday, July 7, 2008
Location: The Migration Board, Department of Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora
Interpretation in English, booked
If you do not XXXXX nearest you notify us as soon as possible on the phone
<quote off>
I don't see anything here about her getting asylum.
.John
I started a thread with the translation too ... they were calling her
in to discuss her "journey home" ..."hemersa" also translated in
context as "repatriation" ... they were shipping her out.
Interesting. I didn't pick up the "repatriation" alternate
translation. Yes, it does sound like they are shipping her out.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2008-12-13 15:09:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13 Dec 2008 09:33:30 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
The repatriation reference refers to the fact that she had obtained a job
and was already in the process of moving.
But it doesn't show that she had asylum.

You said it did.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
j***@gmail.com
2008-12-13 20:38:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 09:33:30 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
The repatriation reference refers to the fact that she had obtained a job
and was already in the process of moving.
But it doesn't show that she had asylum.
McAdams and Barb have been ridiculing the concept that Judyth was involved
with the asylum process in Sweden for over a year. Now they have
documentation to that effect and they are refusing to acknowledge it.
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 23:08:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 09:33:30 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
The repatriation reference refers to the fact that she had obtained a job
and was already in the process of moving.
But it doesn't show that she had asylum.
McAdams and Barb have been ridiculing the concept that Judyth was involved
with the asylum process in Sweden for over a year. Now they have
documentation to that effect and they are refusing to acknowledge it.
You need to learn to read and just quit making stuff up. it's over,
Pam. Didn't you get the memo?
Martin Shackelford
2008-12-14 19:06:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
She had temporary asylum, John, pending a final decision,
--she was denied permanent asylum, and got the job before
the deadline to appeal the decision.

Martin
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 09:33:30 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
The repatriation reference refers to the fact that she had obtained a job
and was already in the process of moving.
But it doesn't show that she had asylum.
You said it did.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 20:02:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
What utter nonsense. When will you finally learn that Judyth is not a
reliable source. Cripes, Martin, she just sent you a document that is
not at all what she had you proclaiming it was all over the newsgroup!
The Swedish govt decision required her to leave Sweden ... because her
appeal was rejected. "Repatriation" help is one thing the Swedes offer
to help people in this circumstance. check their dang website.

Whether she already had a job in some other country, where she was
"already" moving to is not the issue. She was required to leave. She
was called to discuss that with them on July 7th ... and she left the
country a week later.

You may see that as already having been in the "process of moving" ...
but it came on the heels of the Swedes "process" of telling her she
had to leave their country.

Process that.

On 13 Dec 2008 09:33:30 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
The repatriation reference refers to the fact that she had obtained a job
and was already in the process of moving.
Martin
Post by John McAdams
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:03:06 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
On 12 Dec 2008 20:56:05 -0500, "John McAdams"
Post by John McAdams
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put the document up, Anthony. There are several translators
available, as well as at least one person who can read Swedish.
You can read Swedish? It is in a JPG file so I don't see how any automatic
translator could handle it. I think you'll have to OCR it first.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/asylum%20letter%20july%202008HandlerDeleted.jpg
Post by John McAdams
Why not start a new thread with it?
Why not tell me what it says precisely?
<Quote on>
Kallelse
Du Kallas till Migrationsverket for att prata om din hemresa
Datum: mandag den 7 juli 2008
Plats: Migrationsverket, Enheten i Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora
Tolk pa engelska ar bokad
Om du inte XXXXX maste du meddela oss sa snart som mojligt pa telefon
<Quote off>
http://translate.google.com/translate_t?hl=en#
<Quote on>
Summons
You called for the appeal to talk about your journey home
Date: Monday, July 7, 2008
Location: The Migration Board, Department of Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora
Interpretation in English, booked
If you do not XXXXX nearest you notify us as soon as possible on the phone
<quote off>
I don't see anything here about her getting asylum.
.John
I started a thread with the translation too ... they were calling her
in to discuss her "journey home" ..."hemersa" also translated in
context as "repatriation" ... they were shipping her out.
Interesting. I didn't pick up the "repatriation" alternate
translation. Yes, it does sound like they are shipping her out.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Chuck Schuyler
2008-12-13 04:45:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
<Quote on>
Summons
You called for the appeal to talk about your journey home
Date: Monday, July 7, 2008
Location: The Migration Board, Department of Hedemora,
Sturegatan 17, Hedemora
Interpretation in English, booked
If you do not XXXXX nearest you notify us as soon as possible on the phone
<quote off>
I don't see anything here about her getting asylum.
.John
Sure it's there, John.

You just need to rearrange the letters properly.
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 02:54:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Thanks to Tony, this is up on his site.

On 12 Dec 2008 20:24:17 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 12 Dec 2008 15:58:26 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
I just forwarded a copy to Tony Marsh of the letter granting asylum,
which was issued in July of this year.
Translation? Babblefish?
Just put the document up, Anthony. There are several translators
available, as well as at least one person who can read Swedish.
You can read Swedish? It is in a JPG file so I don't see how any automatic
translator could handle it. I think you'll have to OCR it first.
This is so short it's easy to type in to a translator.

Martin should have done so before flying off halfcocked again.

Judyth says this is her document saying her appeal was successful and
she had been granted asylum???

First of all, it's obviously an appointment letter with a date, time
and place listed ... and a phone number to call.

What's the appt about? Type the top line into any Swedish to English
translator.

"Du kallas till Migrationsverket for att prata om din hemresa"

translates as.....

QUOTE
Translation: Swedish » English

You are called to the Migration Board for talking
about your journey home

END QUOTE

Oh Pam? Oh Martin?
Post by Anthony Marsh
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/asylum%20letter%20july%202008HandlerDeleted.jpg
And what's with all the little pieces of silver bag sitting on top of
it? They aren't placed well at all .... that one line says it all.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Why not tell me what it says precisely?
I just did .... but don't believe me .... try any translator you like.

Here's the google translator page:
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html

Oh Pam? Oh Martin?
It appears you have been burned by going on Judyth's sayso ... again.

Martin to John this morning:
"Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John."

Add a word there, Martin, and maybe it will help you and Pam: Get your
facts FIRST.

Barb :-)
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
Barb :-)
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 09:34:32 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Then post your evidence, Martin.
Interesting how all the *available* evidence about Judyth shows she is
lying, but somehow there is always (conveniently) *unavailable*
evidence that shows she is telling the truth.
Post a letter from the Swedish government showing she was granted
asylum. Or maybe a news article saying that her appeal was
successful.
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Grizzlie Antagonist
2008-12-11 16:44:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I came late into this conversation.

What's this -- something about Judyth being admitted to an asylum?
William Yates
2008-12-12 01:22:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.

So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2008-12-12 01:29:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!

Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.

Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
j***@gmail.com
2008-12-12 04:25:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
.John
--------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Rather than even attempt to think critically, McAdams chooses to just make
up stuff and hope something will stick. If he were to show even the
slightest bit of acumen he would realize that the article, which is
out-of-date, contains not only misinformation but disinformation. But will
that happen?
Dave Reitzes
2008-12-13 01:14:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
.John
--------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Rather than even attempt to think critically, McAdams chooses to just make
up stuff and hope something will stick. �If he were to show even the
slightest bit of acumen he would realize that the article, which is
out-of-date, contains not only misinformation but disinformation.
Prove it, Pam.

Dave

http://www.jfk-online.com/judyth-menu.html
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 01:50:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
.John
--------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Rather than even attempt to think critically, McAdams chooses to just make
up stuff and hope something will stick. ?If he were to show even the
slightest bit of acumen he would realize that the article, which is
out-of-date, contains not only misinformation but disinformation.
Prove it, Pam.
Pam prove something? Worked too hard this week, Dave? You seem to be
delirious. Have a nice cup of soothing tea.... Pam's only possible
salvation wiil be Tony putting up the document Martin says he sent to
him to put up.

Why isn't it up yet?

Barb :-)
Post by Dave Reitzes
Dave
http://www.jfk-online.com/judyth-menu.html
Dave Reitzes
2008-12-13 04:41:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
.John
--------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Rather than even attempt to think critically, McAdams chooses to just make
up stuff and hope something will stick. ?If he were to show even the
slightest bit of acumen he would realize that the article, which is
out-of-date, contains not only misinformation but disinformation.
Prove it, Pam.
Pam prove something?
Don't be such a pessimist, Barb. Listen, I have two wonderful little
doggies, and I frequently inquire as to their health ("How you doin'?") or
what activities have been occupying their time most recently ("Whatcha up
to?"). It's true they've never answered me yet, but who's to say they
won't answer next time?


Worked too hard this week, Dave? You seem to be
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
delirious. Have a nice cup of soothing tea....
Maybe you're right, Barb. I'll try to relax, perhaps listen to some
soothing music.

Here's one that always gets my toes tapping: "Sheeple . . . sheeple who
need sheeple . . ."


Pam's only possible
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
salvation wiil be Tony putting up the document Martin says he sent to
him to put up.
Why isn't it up yet?
Barb :-)
It's up. I'm sure Pam will have some MOST impressive insights, what with
her being aware of all the processes 'n' all. (Mostly the process of
repeating bullshit.)

Dave
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 06:58:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
.John
--------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Rather than even attempt to think critically, McAdams chooses to just make
up stuff and hope something will stick. ?If he were to show even the
slightest bit of acumen he would realize that the article, which is
out-of-date, contains not only misinformation but disinformation.
Prove it, Pam.
Pam prove something?
Don't be such a pessimist, Barb. Listen, I have two wonderful little
doggies, and I frequently inquire as to their health ("How you doin'?") or
what activities have been occupying their time most recently ("Whatcha up
to?"). It's true they've never answered me yet, but who's to say they
won't answer next time?
One scenario is more likely to happen than the other.<g>
Post by Dave Reitzes
Worked too hard this week, Dave? You seem to be
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
delirious. Have a nice cup of soothing tea....
Maybe you're right, Barb. I'll try to relax, perhaps listen to some
soothing music.
Here's one that always gets my toes tapping: "Sheeple . . . sheeple who
need sheeple . . ."
Aaaack ... okay, you made me laugh out loud. Good one!
Post by Dave Reitzes
Pam's only possible
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
salvation wiil be Tony putting up the document Martin says he sent to
him to put up.
Why isn't it up yet?
Barb :-)
It's up. I'm sure Pam will have some MOST impressive insights, what with
her being aware of all the processes 'n' all. (Mostly the process of
repeating bullshit.)
Or she'll do that other thing she does....and get very very quiet...
but never own her own "gaffes."

Now I can't get that dumb song out of my head .... may have to count
sheeple to go to sleep!

Barb :-)
Post by Dave Reitzes
Dave
Dave Reitzes
2008-12-13 20:24:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
.John
--------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Rather than even attempt to think critically, McAdams chooses to just make
up stuff and hope something will stick. ?If he were to show even the
slightest bit of acumen he would realize that the article, which is
out-of-date, contains not only misinformation but disinformation.
Prove it, Pam.
Pam prove something?
Don't be such a pessimist, Barb. Listen, I have two wonderful little
doggies, and I frequently inquire as to their health ("How you doin'?") or
what activities have been occupying their time most recently ("Whatcha up
to?"). It's true they've never answered me yet, but who's to say they
won't answer next time?
One scenario is more likely to happen than the other.<g>
Handicappers take note: one of my dogs is stone cold deaf.
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Dave Reitzes
Worked too hard this week, Dave? You seem to be
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
delirious. Have a nice cup of soothing tea....
Maybe you're right, Barb. I'll try to relax, perhaps listen to some
soothing music.
Here's one that always gets my toes tapping: "Sheeple . . . sheeple who
need sheeple . . ."
Aaaack ... okay, you made me laugh out loud. Good one!
They're the luckiest sheeple in the world, Barb!
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Dave Reitzes
Pam's only possible
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
salvation wiil be Tony putting up the document Martin says he sent to
him to put up.
Why isn't it up yet?
Barb :-)
It's up. I'm sure Pam will have some MOST impressive insights, what with
her being aware of all the processes 'n' all. (Mostly the process of
repeating bullshit.)
Or she'll do that other thing she does....and get very very quiet...
but never own her own "gaffes."
Now I can't get that dumb song out of my head .... may have to count
sheeple to go to sleep!
Ah, that reminds me of another chestnut . . . "The Two Sleepy
Sheeple."

Dave
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 23:14:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
.John
--------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Rather than even attempt to think critically, McAdams chooses to just make
up stuff and hope something will stick. ?If he were to show even the
slightest bit of acumen he would realize that the article, which is
out-of-date, contains not only misinformation but disinformation.
Prove it, Pam.
Pam prove something?
Don't be such a pessimist, Barb. Listen, I have two wonderful little
doggies, and I frequently inquire as to their health ("How you doin'?") or
what activities have been occupying their time most recently ("Whatcha up
to?"). It's true they've never answered me yet, but who's to say they
won't answer next time?
One scenario is more likely to happen than the other.<g>
Handicappers take note: one of my dogs is stone cold deaf.
HAHAHA! Love it! Poor doggie .... mine just acts deaf when she wants
to ....
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Dave Reitzes
Worked too hard this week, Dave? You seem to be
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
delirious. Have a nice cup of soothing tea....
Maybe you're right, Barb. I'll try to relax, perhaps listen to some
soothing music.
Here's one that always gets my toes tapping: "Sheeple . . . sheeple who
need sheeple . . ."
Aaaack ... okay, you made me laugh out loud. Good one!
They're the luckiest sheeple in the world, Barb!
:-^)
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Dave Reitzes
Pam's only possible
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
salvation wiil be Tony putting up the document Martin says he sent to
him to put up.
Why isn't it up yet?
Barb :-)
It's up. I'm sure Pam will have some MOST impressive insights, what with
her being aware of all the processes 'n' all. (Mostly the process of
repeating bullshit.)
Or she'll do that other thing she does....and get very very quiet...
but never own her own "gaffes."
Now I can't get that dumb song out of my head .... may have to count
sheeple to go to sleep!
Ah, that reminds me of another chestnut . . . "The Two Sleepy
Sheeple."
Sheeple everywhere just wanna be free - you Rascal.<g>

Barb :-)
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-12 18:12:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
More propaganda. How do you explain the fact that she was granted
asylum? Why don't you make up a story that she bribed the officials or
something like that? You need some twist to worm you way out of an
embarrassing situation.
Post by John McAdams
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
j***@gmail.com
2008-12-12 21:00:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
More propaganda. How do you explain the fact that she was granted
asylum? Why don't you make up a story that she bribed the officials or
something like that? You need some twist to worm you way out of an
embarrassing situation.
McAdams was unable to assess the article appropriately in the first place,
so jumped to conclusions. Now, realizing that that is making him look
silly, he is changing his statements and trying to push blame on others.
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-12 21:43:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
More propaganda. How do you explain the fact that she was granted
asylum? Why don't you make up a story that she bribed the officials or
something like that? You need some twist to worm you way out of an
embarrassing situation.
McAdams was unable to assess the article appropriately in the first place,
so jumped to conclusions. Now, realizing that that is making him look
silly, he is changing his statements and trying to push blame on others.
This is gonna be good! Keep going, Pam, keep going! <g>
Grizzlie Antagonist
2008-12-13 04:50:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Why don't you apologize then?

Why should you deny yourself the privilege of getting to make things up?
--
"Populus me sibilat, at mihi plaudo." ("The people hiss at me, but I am well
satisfied with myself") - Horace, Book 1, Satire 1
Martin Shackelford
2008-12-13 14:37:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I think the confusion here is between temporary asylum (which she
received) and permanent asylum (which she didn't appeal to get as
she had already landed a job elsewhere).

Martin
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or
is this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
More propaganda. How do you explain the fact that she was granted asylum?
Why don't you make up a story that she bribed the officials or something
like that? You need some twist to worm you way out of an embarrassing
situation.
Post by John McAdams
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2008-12-13 15:15:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13 Dec 2008 09:37:06 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
I think the confusion here is between temporary asylum (which she
received) and permanent asylum (which she didn't appeal to get as
she had already landed a job elsewhere).
Oh, my, yet another wrinkle in the story!

First, "she got asylum."

But then I posted an article saying she did not get asylum, and then
it became "she got asylum on appeal after having been turned down."

And now, after posting a document that was *supposed* to show she got
asylum (but doesn't show that) it's "she got temporary asylum, not
permanent asylum, but just in time for her to leave the country."

Martin, post the document that shows she got asylum *at all.*

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-13 20:43:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 09:37:06 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
I think the confusion here is between temporary asylum (which she
received) and permanent asylum (which she didn't appeal to get as
she had already landed a job elsewhere).
Oh, my, yet another wrinkle in the story!
First, "she got asylum."
But then I posted an article saying she did not get asylum, and then
it became "she got asylum on appeal after having been turned down."
And now, after posting a document that was *supposed* to show she got
asylum (but doesn't show that) it's "she got temporary asylum, not
permanent asylum, but just in time for her to leave the country."
As I predicted, team McAdams has changed the definitions after they lost
the argument. You admit that she got temporary asylum, but complain that
she did not get permanent asylum.
Post by John McAdams
Martin, post the document that shows she got asylum *at all.*
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Bud
2008-12-14 01:22:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 09:37:06 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
I think the confusion here is between temporary asylum (which she
received) and permanent asylum (which she didn't appeal to get as
she had already landed a job elsewhere).
Oh, my, yet another wrinkle in the story!
First, "she got asylum."
But then I posted an article saying she did not get asylum, and then
it became "she got asylum on appeal after having been turned down."
And now, after posting a document that was *supposed* to show she got
asylum (but doesn't show that) it's "she got temporary asylum, not
permanent asylum, but just in time for her to leave the country."
As I predicted, team McAdams has changed the definitions after they lost
the argument.
Every thinking person on this board knew for a fact that when Martin
produced that document, it would not support his claims. Like a train
wreak, it was just a matter of watching it play out. Out of the smoking
wreckage, you claim victory (while Martin merely claims calamity was
averted at the last minute).
Post by Anthony Marsh
You admit that she got temporary asylum,
Nobody but Martin made that claim. Do you even know whether the Swedes
have such a designation as "temporary asylum"?
Post by Anthony Marsh
but complain that
she did not get permanent asylum.
<snicker> By all means, produce something saying she had any flavor
of asylum at all. A post-it note in decipherable jibberish.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
Martin, post the document that shows she got asylum *at all.*
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 21:20:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I think the confusion here is yours if you think anyone is going to
buy into this late date lame punt. You and Pam have been posting for
months that she was granted asylum. Period. Just within the last 48
hours you posted that her application for asylum had been rejected,
but she had appealed ... and was successful and granted asylum ...
and, by golly, you had just sent Tony the document to post that proved
it.

We know how that turned out.

Both you and Pam have done a shift in the tune you are whistling.
Doesn't work, Martin. Stop insulting people's intelligence. Can't you
ever admit anything.

QUOTE from day before yesterday:
Martin Shackelford wrote:
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.

Martin
END QUOTE
Post by Martin Shackelford
I think the confusion here is between temporary asylum (which she
received) and permanent asylum (which she didn't appeal to get as
she had already landed a job elsewhere).
Martin
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or
is this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
More propaganda. How do you explain the fact that she was granted asylum?
Why don't you make up a story that she bribed the officials or something
like that? You need some twist to worm you way out of an embarrassing
situation.
Post by John McAdams
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2008-12-13 22:48:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 13:20:59 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
I think the confusion here is yours if you think anyone is going to
buy into this late date lame punt. You and Pam have been posting for
months that she was granted asylum. Period. Just within the last 48
hours you posted that her application for asylum had been rejected,
but she had appealed ... and was successful and granted asylum ...
and, by golly, you had just sent Tony the document to post that proved
it.
We know how that turned out.
Both you and Pam have done a shift in the tune you are whistling.
Doesn't work, Martin. Stop insulting people's intelligence.
If they minded insulting people's intelligence, they would never have
been promoting Judyth.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Bud
2008-12-14 01:19:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Martin Shackelford
I think the confusion here is between temporary asylum (which she
received) and permanent asylum (which she didn't appeal to get as
she had already landed a job elsewhere).
<snicker> Yah, Martin, spin that shit, there is always another cup you
can produce to hide the ball under. She successfully sued for asylum so
she could leave the country. So, do you have some random irrelevant
foreign correspondence to back up THIS claim? A restaurant receipt maybe?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by John McAdams
On 11 Dec 2008 20:22:40 -0500, William Yates
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or
is this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
I think you know the answer to that!
Clearly, the "appeal" story was produced by Judyth in response to my
post saying that she had been turned down.
Of course, the notion that Swedish authorities, having established
that she is a crackpot and has no basis for an asylum claim, would
reverse themselves is vastly implausible.
More propaganda. How do you explain the fact that she was granted asylum?
Why don't you make up a story that she bribed the officials or something
like that? You need some twist to worm you way out of an embarrassing
situation.
Post by John McAdams
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
j***@gmail.com
2008-12-12 04:25:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article has been available for a long time, but it is only now that
McAdams and Barb are acknowledging it. Why is that?

This article provides objective corroboration for the fact that Judyth was
involved in the Swedish asylum system in 2007. Why was this information
not included in the recent newspaper article? Surely Barb and McAdams did
research on this issue, as it had been discussed on aaj in different
threads.
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-12 05:33:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article has been available for a long time, but it is only now that
McAdams and Barb are acknowledging it. Why is that?
Never saw it before. But since you knew about it, why didn't you make
sure the reporter knew about it ... and about the appeal that was
a;;egedly successful? Should have put that "critical thinking" on cap,
I reckon.
Post by j***@gmail.com
This article provides objective corroboration for the fact that Judyth was
involved in the Swedish asylum system in 2007.
Yup.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Why was this information
not included in the recent newspaper article?
Why don't you ask yourself ... or Martin? Team Judyth had the info,
not me.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Surely Barb and McAdams did
research on this issue, as it had been discussed on aaj in different
threads.
Nope, never had. Didn't really care, it just sounded flaky that any
country would giver her asylum...and I said so.

Am interested a bit now, though ... not because of Judyth, but because
of claims you and Martin keep making sans any substantiation ... and
if either of you knew about this article, then you knew she had been
turned down ... so you decided to hide that and keep saying she had
asylum....

OR ... you knew she had successfully appealed and had the
documentation for that .... and decided not to support your claim
which had indeed been posted?

I don't think so.

OR ... more likely and typical, neither of you had seen any
substantition and just run with whatever Judyth tells you.

"Brilliant researchers" and "critical thinking" types that you are.

Martin was in touch with the reprter, Pam.
JUDYTH was in touch with the reporter, Pam.

It doesn't take much critical thinking to know that all you want to do
here is make up a slime trail to attack me and John.

Typical. And, as usual ... lame, ridiculous and soooooo obvious.
Martin Shackelford
2008-12-12 13:04:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I didn't have the letter granting asylum until after the Florida article
made it an
issue. I have now provided it to Tony to post. Wrong again, Barb.

Martin
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article has been available for a long time, but it is only now that
McAdams and Barb are acknowledging it. Why is that?
Never saw it before. But since you knew about it, why didn't you make
sure the reporter knew about it ... and about the appeal that was
a;;egedly successful? Should have put that "critical thinking" on cap,
I reckon.
Post by j***@gmail.com
This article provides objective corroboration for the fact that Judyth was
involved in the Swedish asylum system in 2007.
Yup.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Why was this information
not included in the recent newspaper article?
Why don't you ask yourself ... or Martin? Team Judyth had the info,
not me.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Surely Barb and McAdams did
research on this issue, as it had been discussed on aaj in different
threads.
Nope, never had. Didn't really care, it just sounded flaky that any
country would giver her asylum...and I said so.
Am interested a bit now, though ... not because of Judyth, but because
of claims you and Martin keep making sans any substantiation ... and
if either of you knew about this article, then you knew she had been
turned down ... so you decided to hide that and keep saying she had
asylum....
OR ... you knew she had successfully appealed and had the
documentation for that .... and decided not to support your claim
which had indeed been posted?
I don't think so.
OR ... more likely and typical, neither of you had seen any
substantition and just run with whatever Judyth tells you.
"Brilliant researchers" and "critical thinking" types that you are.
Martin was in touch with the reprter, Pam.
JUDYTH was in touch with the reporter, Pam.
It doesn't take much critical thinking to know that all you want to do
here is make up a slime trail to attack me and John.
Typical. And, as usual ... lame, ridiculous and soooooo obvious.
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-12 18:22:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12 Dec 2008 08:04:32 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
I didn't have the letter granting asylum until after the Florida article
made it an
issue. I have now provided it to Tony to post. Wrong again, Barb.
A letter from Swedish officials saying she has been granted asylum
will wrap this up nicely, Martin. Can't wait to see it. :-)
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article has been available for a long time, but it is only now that
McAdams and Barb are acknowledging it. Why is that?
Never saw it before. But since you knew about it, why didn't you make
sure the reporter knew about it ... and about the appeal that was
a;;egedly successful? Should have put that "critical thinking" on cap,
I reckon.
Post by j***@gmail.com
This article provides objective corroboration for the fact that Judyth was
involved in the Swedish asylum system in 2007.
Yup.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Why was this information
not included in the recent newspaper article?
Why don't you ask yourself ... or Martin? Team Judyth had the info,
not me.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Surely Barb and McAdams did
research on this issue, as it had been discussed on aaj in different
threads.
Nope, never had. Didn't really care, it just sounded flaky that any
country would giver her asylum...and I said so.
Am interested a bit now, though ... not because of Judyth, but because
of claims you and Martin keep making sans any substantiation ... and
if either of you knew about this article, then you knew she had been
turned down ... so you decided to hide that and keep saying she had
asylum....
OR ... you knew she had successfully appealed and had the
documentation for that .... and decided not to support your claim
which had indeed been posted?
I don't think so.
OR ... more likely and typical, neither of you had seen any
substantition and just run with whatever Judyth tells you.
"Brilliant researchers" and "critical thinking" types that you are.
Martin was in touch with the reprter, Pam.
JUDYTH was in touch with the reporter, Pam.
It doesn't take much critical thinking to know that all you want to do
here is make up a slime trail to attack me and John.
Typical. And, as usual ... lame, ridiculous and soooooo obvious.
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-13 01:44:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
On 12 Dec 2008 08:04:32 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
I didn't have the letter granting asylum until after the Florida article
made it an
issue. I have now provided it to Tony to post. Wrong again, Barb.
A letter from Swedish officials saying she has been granted asylum
will wrap this up nicely, Martin. Can't wait to see it. :-)
Nah, you'll claim it is a fake or really does not grant permanent asylum.
Anything to demonize Judyth.
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article has been available for a long time, but it is only now that
McAdams and Barb are acknowledging it. Why is that?
Never saw it before. But since you knew about it, why didn't you make
sure the reporter knew about it ... and about the appeal that was
a;;egedly successful? Should have put that "critical thinking" on cap,
I reckon.
Post by j***@gmail.com
This article provides objective corroboration for the fact that Judyth was
involved in the Swedish asylum system in 2007.
Yup.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Why was this information
not included in the recent newspaper article?
Why don't you ask yourself ... or Martin? Team Judyth had the info,
not me.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Surely Barb and McAdams did
research on this issue, as it had been discussed on aaj in different
threads.
Nope, never had. Didn't really care, it just sounded flaky that any
country would giver her asylum...and I said so.
Am interested a bit now, though ... not because of Judyth, but because
of claims you and Martin keep making sans any substantiation ... and
if either of you knew about this article, then you knew she had been
turned down ... so you decided to hide that and keep saying she had
asylum....
OR ... you knew she had successfully appealed and had the
documentation for that .... and decided not to support your claim
which had indeed been posted?
I don't think so.
OR ... more likely and typical, neither of you had seen any
substantition and just run with whatever Judyth tells you.
"Brilliant researchers" and "critical thinking" types that you are.
Martin was in touch with the reprter, Pam.
JUDYTH was in touch with the reporter, Pam.
It doesn't take much critical thinking to know that all you want to do
here is make up a slime trail to attack me and John.
Typical. And, as usual ... lame, ridiculous and soooooo obvious.
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-12 19:34:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12 Dec 2008 08:04:32 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
I didn't have the letter granting asylum until after the Florida article
made it an
issue.
So you had been making claims of fact based solely on Judyth's sayso.
Imagine our shock...

Barb :-)
Post by Martin Shackelford
I have now provided it to Tony to post. Wrong again, Barb.
Martin
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article has been available for a long time, but it is only now that
McAdams and Barb are acknowledging it. Why is that?
Never saw it before. But since you knew about it, why didn't you make
sure the reporter knew about it ... and about the appeal that was
a;;egedly successful? Should have put that "critical thinking" on cap,
I reckon.
Post by j***@gmail.com
This article provides objective corroboration for the fact that Judyth was
involved in the Swedish asylum system in 2007.
Yup.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Why was this information
not included in the recent newspaper article?
Why don't you ask yourself ... or Martin? Team Judyth had the info,
not me.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Surely Barb and McAdams did
research on this issue, as it had been discussed on aaj in different
threads.
Nope, never had. Didn't really care, it just sounded flaky that any
country would giver her asylum...and I said so.
Am interested a bit now, though ... not because of Judyth, but because
of claims you and Martin keep making sans any substantiation ... and
if either of you knew about this article, then you knew she had been
turned down ... so you decided to hide that and keep saying she had
asylum....
OR ... you knew she had successfully appealed and had the
documentation for that .... and decided not to support your claim
which had indeed been posted?
I don't think so.
OR ... more likely and typical, neither of you had seen any
substantition and just run with whatever Judyth tells you.
"Brilliant researchers" and "critical thinking" types that you are.
Martin was in touch with the reprter, Pam.
JUDYTH was in touch with the reporter, Pam.
It doesn't take much critical thinking to know that all you want to do
here is make up a slime trail to attack me and John.
Typical. And, as usual ... lame, ridiculous and soooooo obvious.
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-13 01:51:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
On 12 Dec 2008 08:04:32 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
I didn't have the letter granting asylum until after the Florida article
made it an
issue.
So you had been making claims of fact based solely on Judyth's sayso.
Imagine our shock...
Hmm. So who else is going to tell him? You? McAdams? The New York Times?
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Barb :-)
Post by Martin Shackelford
I have now provided it to Tony to post. Wrong again, Barb.
Martin
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article has been available for a long time, but it is only now that
McAdams and Barb are acknowledging it. Why is that?
Never saw it before. But since you knew about it, why didn't you make
sure the reporter knew about it ... and about the appeal that was
a;;egedly successful? Should have put that "critical thinking" on cap,
I reckon.
Post by j***@gmail.com
This article provides objective corroboration for the fact that Judyth was
involved in the Swedish asylum system in 2007.
Yup.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Why was this information
not included in the recent newspaper article?
Why don't you ask yourself ... or Martin? Team Judyth had the info,
not me.
Post by j***@gmail.com
Surely Barb and McAdams did
research on this issue, as it had been discussed on aaj in different
threads.
Nope, never had. Didn't really care, it just sounded flaky that any
country would giver her asylum...and I said so.
Am interested a bit now, though ... not because of Judyth, but because
of claims you and Martin keep making sans any substantiation ... and
if either of you knew about this article, then you knew she had been
turned down ... so you decided to hide that and keep saying she had
asylum....
OR ... you knew she had successfully appealed and had the
documentation for that .... and decided not to support your claim
which had indeed been posted?
I don't think so.
OR ... more likely and typical, neither of you had seen any
substantition and just run with whatever Judyth tells you.
"Brilliant researchers" and "critical thinking" types that you are.
Martin was in touch with the reprter, Pam.
JUDYTH was in touch with the reporter, Pam.
It doesn't take much critical thinking to know that all you want to do
here is make up a slime trail to attack me and John.
Typical. And, as usual ... lame, ridiculous and soooooo obvious.
j***@gmail.com
2008-12-12 13:05:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_frm/thread/8a52d66bf40d6376/b568fb810a53d53c?lnk=gst&q=judyth+asylum+barb#b568fb810a53d53c
Good question Barb!
I have always wondered about that too and it make no sense to me either!
Why would anyone need to be threatening her so severly, since she has
already let the catllle out, long ago. If perhaps Govt. might be after
her, they could have nabbed her long ago.
How does anyone really know if what she is claiming is even true or
not...that she has been granted political asylum in Sweden? Seems this
is all, only her own say-so.
______
Dixie
Hi Dixie!

You said it, girl. Another "Judyth said so" "fact." And it certainly
does seem like nonsense. This is one of those things that could be
fact checked ... though it might be difficult dealing with state
departments. But difficult does not mean impossible. :-)

Nice to see you !
Barb :-)
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-12 19:26:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_frm/thread/8a52d66bf40d6376/b568fb810a53d53c?lnk=gst&q=judyth+asylum+barb#b568fb810a53d53c
Good question Barb!
I have always wondered about that too and it make no sense to me either!
Why would anyone need to be threatening her so severly, since she has
already let the catllle out, long ago. If perhaps Govt. might be after
her, they could have nabbed her long ago.
How does anyone really know if what she is claiming is even true or
not...that she has been granted political asylum in Sweden? Seems this
is all, only her own say-so.
______
Dixie
Hi Dixie!
You said it, girl. Another "Judyth said so" "fact." And it certainly
does seem like nonsense. This is one of those things that could be
fact checked ... though it might be difficult dealing with state
departments. But difficult does not mean impossible. :-)
Nice to see you !
Barb :-)
I expect you think you have a point here. You don't have one about me
... but it does bring to mind that you and Martin have been claiming
this asylum thing as fact, and since Martin posted just today that he
DID NOT HAVE what he says is the letter saying she was granted asylum
until the last day or so ... that means you have both been running
solely on Judyth's sayso.

Thanks for pointing it out.

And I stand by what I said ... for it is true. This one of those
things that someone could have checked out ... and should have before
they started touting it as fact. One would think you and Martin would
have learned that by now.
j***@gmail.com
2008-12-12 21:03:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Barb is some researcher, and her buddy Chris is some reporter. They
choose to ignore information in the public domain, or actually do some
information gathering on their own and omit mention of Judyth's
involvement in the asylum process in Sweden from their news article.
Instead, they choose to paint Judyth in a negative light and imply that
she did not attend her Mother's funeral because she didn't choose to, when
the fact is that she was not free to travel.

In addition, Barb is happy to cast blame on others rather than take
responsibility for her own refusal to acknowledge our statements last
winter of Judyth's seeking asylum.
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-12 21:36:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
Barb is some researcher, and her buddy Chris is some reporter. They
choose to ignore information in the public domain, or actually do some
information gathering on their own and omit mention of Judyth's
involvement in the asylum process in Sweden from their news article.
Instead, they choose to paint Judyth in a negative light and imply that
she did not attend her Mother's funeral because she didn't choose to, when
the fact is that she was not free to travel.
In addition, Barb is happy to cast blame on others rather than take
responsibility for her own refusal to acknowledge our statements last
winter of Judyth's seeking asylum.
Quite a baloney machine you are .... Oscar Meyer could put you to
work!

I am always happy to take responsibility for my words; the idiotic
lengths you go to to manufacture your sand castles out of any words
myself or others have said seems to know no bounds.... and are your
problem alone.
Dave Reitzes
2008-12-13 01:15:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Barb is some researcher, and her buddy Chris is some reporter. �They
choose to ignore information in the public domain, or actually do some
information gathering on their own and omit mention of Judyth's
involvement in the asylum process in Sweden from their news article.
Instead, they choose to paint Judyth in a negative light and imply that
she did not attend her Mother's funeral because she didn't choose to, when
the fact is that she was not free to travel.
Your proof for this?
In addition, Barb is happy to cast blame on others rather than take
responsibility for her own refusal to acknowledge our statements last
winter of Judyth's seeking asylum.
And you backed these statements up with what evidence?

What kind of researcher would accept your claims as fact, Pamela?

Dave
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-13 01:50:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
Barb is some researcher, and her buddy Chris is some reporter. They
choose to ignore information in the public domain, or actually do some
information gathering on their own and omit mention of Judyth's
involvement in the asylum process in Sweden from their news article.
Instead, they choose to paint Judyth in a negative light and imply that
she did not attend her Mother's funeral because she didn't choose to, when
the fact is that she was not free to travel.
At all costs they must demonize Judyth. Otherwise they think it proves
there was a conspiracy.
Post by j***@gmail.com
In addition, Barb is happy to cast blame on others rather than take
responsibility for her own refusal to acknowledge our statements last
winter of Judyth's seeking asylum.
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 03:27:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12 Dec 2008 20:50:41 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by j***@gmail.com
Barb is some researcher, and her buddy Chris is some reporter. They
choose to ignore information in the public domain, or actually do some
information gathering on their own and omit mention of Judyth's
involvement in the asylum process in Sweden from their news article.
Instead, they choose to paint Judyth in a negative light and imply that
she did not attend her Mother's funeral because she didn't choose to, when
the fact is that she was not free to travel.
At all costs they must demonize Judyth. Otherwise they think it proves
there was a conspiracy.
Thyere was a conspiracy. Judyth just had no part in any of it. I do
not demonize her....but you and Pam do a dandy job of spreading that
kind of garbage ... probably planting the seed in people's minds. With
friends like you guys, Judyth doesn't need to worry about the people
in white vans.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by j***@gmail.com
In addition, Barb is happy to cast blame on others rather than take
responsibility for her own refusal to acknowledge our statements last
winter of Judyth's seeking asylum.
Steve Thomas
2008-12-13 04:53:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Anthony Marsh
Barb is some researcher, and her buddy Chris is some reporter.  They
choose to ignore information in the public domain, or actually do some
information gathering on their own and omit mention of Judyth's
involvement in the asylum process in Sweden from their news article.
Instead, they choose to paint Judyth in a negative light and imply that
she did not attend her Mother's funeral because she didn't choose to, when
the fact is that she was not free to travel.
At all costs they must demonize Judyth. Otherwise they think it proves
there was a conspiracy.
Demonize? By pointing out that Judyth lies 87% of the time?
Post by Anthony Marsh
In addition, Barb is happy to cast blame on others rather than take
responsibility for her own refusal to acknowledge our statements last
winter of Judyth's seeking asylum.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-13 20:44:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve Thomas
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by j***@gmail.com
Barb is some researcher, and her buddy Chris is some reporter. They
choose to ignore information in the public domain, or actually do some
information gathering on their own and omit mention of Judyth's
involvement in the asylum process in Sweden from their news article.
Instead, they choose to paint Judyth in a negative light and imply that
she did not attend her Mother's funeral because she didn't choose to, when
the fact is that she was not free to travel.
At all costs they must demonize Judyth. Otherwise they think it proves
there was a conspiracy.
Demonize? By pointing out that Judyth lies 87% of the time?
Yes, demonize at every opportunity. I never said she lied 87% of the time.
Post by Steve Thomas
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by j***@gmail.com
In addition, Barb is happy to cast blame on others rather than take
responsibility for her own refusal to acknowledge our statements last
winter of Judyth's seeking asylum.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-13 01:52:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by j***@gmail.com
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_frm/thread/8a52d66bf40d6376/b568fb810a53d53c?lnk=gst&q=judyth+asylum+barb#b568fb810a53d53c
Good question Barb!
I have always wondered about that too and it make no sense to me either!
Why would anyone need to be threatening her so severly, since she has
already let the catllle out, long ago. If perhaps Govt. might be after
her, they could have nabbed her long ago.
How does anyone really know if what she is claiming is even true or
not...that she has been granted political asylum in Sweden? Seems this
is all, only her own say-so.
______
Dixie
Hi Dixie!
You said it, girl. Another "Judyth said so" "fact." And it certainly
does seem like nonsense. This is one of those things that could be
fact checked ... though it might be difficult dealing with state
departments. But difficult does not mean impossible. :-)
Nice to see you !
Barb :-)
I expect you think you have a point here. You don't have one about me
... but it does bring to mind that you and Martin have been claiming
this asylum thing as fact, and since Martin posted just today that he
Well, the asylum thing IS a fact. Can you explain how the officials could
grant her asylum if she did not seek it? How exactly does that work?
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
DID NOT HAVE what he says is the letter saying she was granted asylum
until the last day or so ... that means you have both been running
solely on Judyth's sayso.
Thanks for pointing it out.
And I stand by what I said ... for it is true. This one of those
things that someone could have checked out ... and should have before
they started touting it as fact. One would think you and Martin would
have learned that by now.
This is one of the things you could have checked out, but you refuse to do
any actual research.
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 03:30:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12 Dec 2008 20:52:08 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by j***@gmail.com
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_frm/thread/8a52d66bf40d6376/b568fb810a53d53c?lnk=gst&q=judyth+asylum+barb#b568fb810a53d53c
Good question Barb!
I have always wondered about that too and it make no sense to me either!
Why would anyone need to be threatening her so severly, since she has
already let the catllle out, long ago. If perhaps Govt. might be after
her, they could have nabbed her long ago.
How does anyone really know if what she is claiming is even true or
not...that she has been granted political asylum in Sweden? Seems this
is all, only her own say-so.
______
Dixie
Hi Dixie!
You said it, girl. Another "Judyth said so" "fact." And it certainly
does seem like nonsense. This is one of those things that could be
fact checked ... though it might be difficult dealing with state
departments. But difficult does not mean impossible. :-)
Nice to see you !
Barb :-)
I expect you think you have a point here. You don't have one about me
... but it does bring to mind that you and Martin have been claiming
this asylum thing as fact, and since Martin posted just today that he
Well, the asylum thing IS a fact. Can you explain how the officials could
grant her asylum if she did not seek it? How exactly does that work?
try to keep up, Anthony.

No one ever said she didn't apply for asylum
And .. they did not grant her asylum.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
DID NOT HAVE what he says is the letter saying she was granted asylum
until the last day or so ... that means you have both been running
solely on Judyth's sayso.
Thanks for pointing it out.
And I stand by what I said ... for it is true. This one of those
things that someone could have checked out ... and should have before
they started touting it as fact. One would think you and Martin would
have learned that by now.
This is one of the things you could have checked out, but you refuse to do
any actual research.
Yeah, I'm the one with the reputation for that, Tony.
Martin Shackelford
2008-12-13 14:37:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Interesting. I mention the letter, and you assume that the letter is the
ONLY
source besides Judyth. You have been running on a lot of assumptions
lately, Barb.

Martin
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by j***@gmail.com
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_frm/thread/8a52d66bf40d6376/b568fb810a53d53c?lnk=gst&q=judyth+asylum+barb#b568fb810a53d53c
Good question Barb!
I have always wondered about that too and it make no sense to me either!
Why would anyone need to be threatening her so severly, since she has
already let the catllle out, long ago. If perhaps Govt. might be after
her, they could have nabbed her long ago.
How does anyone really know if what she is claiming is even true or
not...that she has been granted political asylum in Sweden? Seems this
is all, only her own say-so.
______
Dixie
Hi Dixie!
You said it, girl. Another "Judyth said so" "fact." And it certainly
does seem like nonsense. This is one of those things that could be
fact checked ... though it might be difficult dealing with state
departments. But difficult does not mean impossible. :-)
Nice to see you !
Barb :-)
I expect you think you have a point here. You don't have one about me
... but it does bring to mind that you and Martin have been claiming
this asylum thing as fact, and since Martin posted just today that he
DID NOT HAVE what he says is the letter saying she was granted asylum
until the last day or so ... that means you have both been running
solely on Judyth's sayso.
Thanks for pointing it out.
And I stand by what I said ... for it is true. This one of those
things that someone could have checked out ... and should have before
they started touting it as fact. One would think you and Martin would
have learned that by now.
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 20:26:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13 Dec 2008 09:37:17 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
Interesting. I mention the letter, and you assume that the letter is the
ONLY
source besides Judyth. You have been running on a lot of assumptions
lately, Barb.
Martin .... if you had another source, you would have used it. What
you claim is not true according to the migration dept in Sweden
records as told to the Swedish gentleman who spoke to an official
there. He's provided the phone number and the name of the person he
spoke to. Your claim, and Judyth's, is also not backed up by the
document she sent you. It is quite in keeping with the info he was
given by the official.

Think, Matin. Think.

You run on false hope and blind faith. And Judyth's sayso. We've seen
it over and over and over again. Frankly, by this point in time, it is
painful to even watch.
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by j***@gmail.com
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_frm/thread/8a52d66bf40d6376/b568fb810a53d53c?lnk=gst&q=judyth+asylum+barb#b568fb810a53d53c
Good question Barb!
I have always wondered about that too and it make no sense to me either!
Why would anyone need to be threatening her so severly, since she has
already let the catllle out, long ago. If perhaps Govt. might be after
her, they could have nabbed her long ago.
How does anyone really know if what she is claiming is even true or
not...that she has been granted political asylum in Sweden? Seems this
is all, only her own say-so.
______
Dixie
Hi Dixie!
You said it, girl. Another "Judyth said so" "fact." And it certainly
does seem like nonsense. This is one of those things that could be
fact checked ... though it might be difficult dealing with state
departments. But difficult does not mean impossible. :-)
Nice to see you !
Barb :-)
I expect you think you have a point here. You don't have one about me
... but it does bring to mind that you and Martin have been claiming
this asylum thing as fact, and since Martin posted just today that he
DID NOT HAVE what he says is the letter saying she was granted asylum
until the last day or so ... that means you have both been running
solely on Judyth's sayso.
Thanks for pointing it out.
And I stand by what I said ... for it is true. This one of those
things that someone could have checked out ... and should have before
they started touting it as fact. One would think you and Martin would
have learned that by now.
Dave Reitzes
2008-12-12 13:12:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article has been available for a long time, but it is only now that
McAdams and Barb are acknowledging it. �Why is that?
This article provides objective corroboration for the fact that Judyth was
involved in the Swedish asylum system in 2007. �
Pam is one hell of a lousy spin doctor. \:^)

Martin and Pam have been claiming for months that Judyth was granted
political asylum in Sweden.

This article says Judyth WASN'T granted political asylum in Sweden.

And Pam claims it as corroboration!

"Black is white, white is black."

Dave

http://www.jfk-online.com/judyth-menu.html



Why was this information
Post by j***@gmail.com
not included in the recent newspaper article? �Surely Barb and McAdams did
research on this issue, as it had been discussed on aaj in different
threads.
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-12 18:11:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article has been available for a long time, but it is only now that
McAdams and Barb are acknowledging it. �Why is that?
This article provides objective corroboration for the fact that Judyth was
involved in the Swedish asylum system in 2007. �
Pam is one hell of a lousy spin doctor. \:^)
Martin and Pam have been claiming for months that Judyth was granted
political asylum in Sweden.
How far out on the limb do you want to go in your denials until we chop
it off?
Post by Dave Reitzes
This article says Judyth WASN'T granted political asylum in Sweden.
Can you translate the Swedish for us?
Post by Dave Reitzes
And Pam claims it as corroboration!
"Black is white, white is black."
Dave
http://www.jfk-online.com/judyth-menu.html
Why was this information
Post by j***@gmail.com
not included in the recent newspaper article? �Surely Barb and McAdams did
research on this issue, as it had been discussed on aaj in different
threads.
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-12 18:34:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
You are soooo below the curve on this, Anthony. LOL

On 12 Dec 2008 13:11:25 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by Dave Reitzes
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article has been available for a long time, but it is only now that
McAdams and Barb are acknowledging it. ?Why is that?
This article provides objective corroboration for the fact that Judyth was
involved in the Swedish asylum system in 2007. ?
Pam is one hell of a lousy spin doctor. \:^)
Martin and Pam have been claiming for months that Judyth was granted
political asylum in Sweden.
How far out on the limb do you want to go in your denials until we chop
it off?
Post by Dave Reitzes
This article says Judyth WASN'T granted political asylum in Sweden.
Can you translate the Swedish for us?
Post by Dave Reitzes
And Pam claims it as corroboration!
"Black is white, white is black."
Dave
http://www.jfk-online.com/judyth-menu.html
Why was this information
Post by j***@gmail.com
not included in the recent newspaper article? ?Surely Barb and McAdams did
research on this issue, as it had been discussed on aaj in different
threads.
Martin Shackelford
2008-12-13 14:39:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
After looking through all of the material on this, it seems that a
deportation order was
issued; she appealed it; the deportation order was canceled on appeal; she
was under
asylum status while her case was being decided; by the time the order was
canceled,
she had already made arrangements to move from Sweden, and so the asylum
matter
became moot. In other words, she was given temporary asylum, but it didn't
go to the
point of deciding whether or not to grant full asylum. By then, she had
obtained a job,
and moved to the job location. That's what has happened to date, and that's
all of the
information I intend to post on this matter.

Martin
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article has been available for a long time, but it is only now that
McAdams and Barb are acknowledging it. ?Why is that?
This article provides objective corroboration for the fact that Judyth was
involved in the Swedish asylum system in 2007. ?
Pam is one hell of a lousy spin doctor. \:^)

Martin and Pam have been claiming for months that Judyth was granted
political asylum in Sweden.

This article says Judyth WASN'T granted political asylum in Sweden.

And Pam claims it as corroboration!

"Black is white, white is black."

Dave

http://www.jfk-online.com/judyth-menu.html



Why was this information
Post by j***@gmail.com
not included in the recent newspaper article? ?Surely Barb and McAdams did
research on this issue, as it had been discussed on aaj in different
threads.
John McAdams
2008-12-13 15:22:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13 Dec 2008 09:39:56 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
After looking through all of the material on this, it seems that a
deportation order was
issued; she appealed it; the deportation order was canceled on appeal; she
was under
asylum status while her case was being decided;
But you said she "got asylum!"

Now you are telling us that all she got was a stay on the deportation
order?

That's not the same thing as getting asylum!
Post by Martin Shackelford
by the time the order was
canceled,
she had already made arrangements to move from Sweden, and so the asylum
matter
became moot. In other words, she was given temporary asylum,
OIC. So *now* all "asylum" means is that they let her stay while they
were trying to decide whether to deport her.

That's not "asylum," Martin.

This is sounding a lot like "Cancun." She tells a lie, and then we
get a long and convoluted series of explanations as to how it really
wasn't a lie.
Post by Martin Shackelford
but it didn't
go to the
point of deciding whether or not to grant full asylum. By then, she had
obtained a job,
and moved to the job location. That's what has happened to date, and that's
all of the
information I intend to post on this matter.
Translation: you aren't going to actually post any document showing
that she got asylum.

You already posted one that *didn't* show any such thing.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 21:35:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 09:22:13 -0600, John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 09:39:56 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
After looking through all of the material on this, it seems that a
deportation order was
issued; she appealed it; the deportation order was canceled on appeal; she
was under
asylum status while her case was being decided;
But you said she "got asylum!"
Now you are telling us that all she got was a stay on the deportation
order?
That's not the same thing as getting asylum!
Post by Martin Shackelford
by the time the order was
canceled,
she had already made arrangements to move from Sweden, and so the asylum
matter
became moot. In other words, she was given temporary asylum,
OIC. So *now* all "asylum" means is that they let her stay while they
were trying to decide whether to deport her.
That's not "asylum," Martin.
This is sounding a lot like "Cancun." She tells a lie, and then we
get a long and convoluted series of explanations as to how it really
wasn't a lie.
Exactly. When "A" doesn't work out, Martin goes to Judyth who explains
it really was because of "B" ... and he works thru the alphabet as
needed on any given issue, just carrying and relating what she tells
him as if it were fact. He's well trained and loyal.

Barb :-)
Post by John McAdams
Post by Martin Shackelford
but it didn't
go to the
point of deciding whether or not to grant full asylum. By then, she had
obtained a job,
and moved to the job location. That's what has happened to date, and that's
all of the
information I intend to post on this matter.
Translation: you aren't going to actually post any document showing
that she got asylum.
You already posted one that *didn't* show any such thing.
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
2008-12-13 22:49:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 13:35:30 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 09:22:13 -0600, John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 09:39:56 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
After looking through all of the material on this, it seems that a
deportation order was
issued; she appealed it; the deportation order was canceled on appeal; she
was under
asylum status while her case was being decided;
But you said she "got asylum!"
Now you are telling us that all she got was a stay on the deportation
order?
That's not the same thing as getting asylum!
Post by Martin Shackelford
by the time the order was
canceled,
she had already made arrangements to move from Sweden, and so the asylum
matter
became moot. In other words, she was given temporary asylum,
OIC. So *now* all "asylum" means is that they let her stay while they
were trying to decide whether to deport her.
That's not "asylum," Martin.
This is sounding a lot like "Cancun." She tells a lie, and then we
get a long and convoluted series of explanations as to how it really
wasn't a lie.
Exactly. When "A" doesn't work out, Martin goes to Judyth who explains
it really was because of "B" ... and he works thru the alphabet as
needed on any given issue, just carrying and relating what she tells
him as if it were fact. He's well trained and loyal.
Sort of like the American Cream Dog!

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 21:30:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13 Dec 2008 09:39:56 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
After looking through all of the material on this, it seems that a
deportation order was
issued; she appealed it; the deportation order was canceled on appeal; she
was under
asylum status while her case was being decided; by the time the order was
canceled,
she had already made arrangements to move from Sweden, and so the asylum
matter
became moot. In other words, she was given temporary asylum, but it didn't
go to the
point of deciding whether or not to grant full asylum. By then, she had
obtained a job,
and moved to the job location. That's what has happened to date, and that's
all of the
information I intend to post on this matter.
Can't blame you on that one, Martin ... one can only come up with so
much baloney.

Anyone who applies for asylum is obviously taken under a wing during
the process... until a decision is made. That's just the way it works.
That is not being "granted" anything, it's part of the process....for
everyone. You can read about their process on their website. :-)

According to the migration official who the Swedish gentleman spoke
to, there was no further appeals ... and yes, there would be a record
of a deportation appeal and cancellation just like the record reflects
the asylum appeal and denial. It's all part of the same process within
the same govt body. And the official said there was nada more.

It's useless for you to comment further anyway because you persist in
spouting whatever Judyth's explanation du jour happens to be. You are
no more a reliable source for anything than she is ... sadly.

And it doesn't seem to phase you the situation running with Judyth's
explanations has put you in.
Post by Martin Shackelford
Martin
Post by j***@gmail.com
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or is
this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This article has been available for a long time, but it is only now that
McAdams and Barb are acknowledging it. ?Why is that?
This article provides objective corroboration for the fact that Judyth was
involved in the Swedish asylum system in 2007. ?
Pam is one hell of a lousy spin doctor. \:^)
Martin and Pam have been claiming for months that Judyth was granted
political asylum in Sweden.
This article says Judyth WASN'T granted political asylum in Sweden.
And Pam claims it as corroboration!
"Black is white, white is black."
Dave
http://www.jfk-online.com/judyth-menu.html
Why was this information
Post by j***@gmail.com
not included in the recent newspaper article? ?Surely Barb and McAdams did
research on this issue, as it had been discussed on aaj in different
threads.
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-12 18:12:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Asylum was initially denied, then granted on appeal.
Try to get ALL of the facts, John.
Martin
I did a search on the website of the newspaper McAdams provided the link
to. That story is the only one about Judyth seeking asylum, or about
Judyth at all.
So, when was the appeal upheld? Will you be sending both the original
decision and the appeal to Marsh to add to his online Judyth shrine? Or
is this as much as we're ever going to get from you on this?
Online shrine? I have also uploaded articles from WC defenders, so why
don't you call it a WC shrine? Bias much?
Post by William Yates
Post by Martin Shackelford
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
j***@gmail.com
2008-12-11 14:35:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
http://www.dt.se/nyheter/dalarna/article253753.ece
http://www.stars21.com/translator/swedish_to_english.html
The article says she did *not* get asylum.
Why did McAdams jump to a conclusion without doing a bit of critical
thinking here? Did he even bother to note the date of the article?
Wouldn't that help him grab a clue?
John McAdams
2008-12-12 18:03:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
This is from an e-mail correspondent in Sweden, the fellow who tipped me
off to the article that says that Judyth did not get asylum.

I'm posting this with his permission:

<Quote on>


Hi John,

I received some information on JVB today (I will have all of this in
writing at the latest by this coming Monday).

These are facts, coming directly from an immigration official here in
Sweden through a phone conversation this morning (and as I'm sure you can
imagine, when it comes to asylum issues, not much of the information in an
application is publicly available, almost all of the info in such a matter
is strictly confidential).

What you see below is publicly available (some of it after some
consideration on the part of this official, I might add..)

JVB:


Arrived in Sweden in September of 2007.
She applied for asylum that same month.

Her asylum application was rejected in November of 2007.
By the 28th of November 2007, she appealed this decision.

Her appeal was rejected 2nd of June this year, 2008.
This last decision could in theory be appealed also, but she didnŽt.

She left Sweden on the 14th of July, 2008.

No new application of asylum has been received by Swedish immigration
authorities from JVB after this date.


- - - - -

In other words, if she still somehow has managed to get her way back into
Sweden, she is staying here illegally. The "granted appeal" discussed in
the forum does not relate to Sweden, period. So unless it relates to some
other country where she's gone through this same procedure after July 14th
of this year, the "granted appeal" is fiction.

Another reflection I do is that the time needed for the authorities to
give her the second rejection (on her appeal)is that six months is an
unusually long period of time. It would have been very interesting to see
that appeal in it's entirety, she must have given them something to think
hard of..unfortunately this is not possible as all such information is
confidential.

And like I said, I will have the dates in writing from the authorities
shortly.

Best regards,


Glenn Viklund

<quote off>

.John

--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-12 18:39:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
This is from an e-mail correspondent in Sweden, the fellow who tipped me
off to the article that says that Judyth did not get asylum.
<Quote on>
Hi John,
I received some information on JVB today (I will have all of this in
writing at the latest by this coming Monday).
These are facts, coming directly from an immigration official here in
Sweden through a phone conversation this morning (and as I'm sure you can
imagine, when it comes to asylum issues, not much of the information in an
application is publicly available, almost all of the info in such a matter
is strictly confidential).
What you see below is publicly available (some of it after some
consideration on the part of this official, I might add..)
Arrived in Sweden in September of 2007.
She applied for asylum that same month.
Her asylum application was rejected in November of 2007.
By the 28th of November 2007, she appealed this decision.
Her appeal was rejected 2nd of June this year, 2008.
This last decision could in theory be appealed also, but she didn´t.
She left Sweden on the 14th of July, 2008.
No new application of asylum has been received by Swedish immigration
authorities from JVB after this date.
- - - - -
In other words, if she still somehow has managed to get her way back into
Sweden, she is staying here illegally. The "granted appeal" discussed in
the forum does not relate to Sweden, period. So unless it relates to some
other country where she's gone through this same procedure after July 14th
of this year, the "granted appeal" is fiction.
Another reflection I do is that the time needed for the authorities to
give her the second rejection (on her appeal)is that six months is an
unusually long period of time. It would have been very interesting to see
that appeal in it's entirety, she must have given them something to think
hard of..unfortunately this is not possible as all such information is
confidential.
And like I said, I will have the dates in writing from the authorities
shortly.
Best regards,
Glenn Viklund
<quote off>
.John
Fancy that. :-)

Information may be coming from two other sources on this soon as well.

Barb :-)
John McAdams
2008-12-12 19:02:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:39:54 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by John McAdams
This is from an e-mail correspondent in Sweden, the fellow who tipped me
off to the article that says that Judyth did not get asylum.
<Quote on>
Hi John,
I received some information on JVB today (I will have all of this in
writing at the latest by this coming Monday).
These are facts, coming directly from an immigration official here in
Sweden through a phone conversation this morning (and as I'm sure you can
imagine, when it comes to asylum issues, not much of the information in an
application is publicly available, almost all of the info in such a matter
is strictly confidential).
What you see below is publicly available (some of it after some
consideration on the part of this official, I might add..)
Arrived in Sweden in September of 2007.
She applied for asylum that same month.
Her asylum application was rejected in November of 2007.
By the 28th of November 2007, she appealed this decision.
Her appeal was rejected 2nd of June this year, 2008.
This last decision could in theory be appealed also, but she didnŽt.
She left Sweden on the 14th of July, 2008.
No new application of asylum has been received by Swedish immigration
authorities from JVB after this date.
- - - - -
In other words, if she still somehow has managed to get her way back into
Sweden, she is staying here illegally. The "granted appeal" discussed in
the forum does not relate to Sweden, period. So unless it relates to some
other country where she's gone through this same procedure after July 14th
of this year, the "granted appeal" is fiction.
Another reflection I do is that the time needed for the authorities to
give her the second rejection (on her appeal)is that six months is an
unusually long period of time. It would have been very interesting to see
that appeal in it's entirety, she must have given them something to think
hard of..unfortunately this is not possible as all such information is
confidential.
And like I said, I will have the dates in writing from the authorities
shortly.
Best regards,
Glenn Viklund
<quote off>
.John
Fancy that. :-)
Information may be coming from two other sources on this soon as well.
I'm thinking that one of those sources may mysteriously dry up.

.John

--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-12 19:32:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 10:39:54 -0800, Barb Junkkarinen
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by John McAdams
This is from an e-mail correspondent in Sweden, the fellow who tipped me
off to the article that says that Judyth did not get asylum.
<Quote on>
Hi John,
I received some information on JVB today (I will have all of this in
writing at the latest by this coming Monday).
These are facts, coming directly from an immigration official here in
Sweden through a phone conversation this morning (and as I'm sure you can
imagine, when it comes to asylum issues, not much of the information in an
application is publicly available, almost all of the info in such a matter
is strictly confidential).
What you see below is publicly available (some of it after some
consideration on the part of this official, I might add..)
Arrived in Sweden in September of 2007.
She applied for asylum that same month.
Her asylum application was rejected in November of 2007.
By the 28th of November 2007, she appealed this decision.
Her appeal was rejected 2nd of June this year, 2008.
This last decision could in theory be appealed also, but she didn´t.
She left Sweden on the 14th of July, 2008.
No new application of asylum has been received by Swedish immigration
authorities from JVB after this date.
- - - - -
In other words, if she still somehow has managed to get her way back into
Sweden, she is staying here illegally. The "granted appeal" discussed in
the forum does not relate to Sweden, period. So unless it relates to some
other country where she's gone through this same procedure after July 14th
of this year, the "granted appeal" is fiction.
Another reflection I do is that the time needed for the authorities to
give her the second rejection (on her appeal)is that six months is an
unusually long period of time. It would have been very interesting to see
that appeal in it's entirety, she must have given them something to think
hard of..unfortunately this is not possible as all such information is
confidential.
And like I said, I will have the dates in writing from the authorities
shortly.
Best regards,
Glenn Viklund
<quote off>
.John
Fancy that. :-)
Information may be coming from two other sources on this soon as well.
I'm thinking that one of those sources may mysteriously dry up.
Possibly. :-)
Post by John McAdams
.John
Martin Shackelford
2008-12-13 20:25:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I know you don't want to pass up the opportunity to hammer her as far
into the ground as you can, Barb. What a lovely person.

Martin
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by John McAdams
This is from an e-mail correspondent in Sweden, the fellow who tipped me
off to the article that says that Judyth did not get asylum.
<Quote on>
Hi John,
I received some information on JVB today (I will have all of this in
writing at the latest by this coming Monday).
These are facts, coming directly from an immigration official here in
Sweden through a phone conversation this morning (and as I'm sure you can
imagine, when it comes to asylum issues, not much of the information in an
application is publicly available, almost all of the info in such a matter
is strictly confidential).
What you see below is publicly available (some of it after some
consideration on the part of this official, I might add..)
Arrived in Sweden in September of 2007.
She applied for asylum that same month.
Her asylum application was rejected in November of 2007.
By the 28th of November 2007, she appealed this decision.
Her appeal was rejected 2nd of June this year, 2008.
This last decision could in theory be appealed also, but she didnŽt.
She left Sweden on the 14th of July, 2008.
No new application of asylum has been received by Swedish immigration
authorities from JVB after this date.
- - - - -
In other words, if she still somehow has managed to get her way back into
Sweden, she is staying here illegally. The "granted appeal" discussed in
the forum does not relate to Sweden, period. So unless it relates to some
other country where she's gone through this same procedure after July 14th
of this year, the "granted appeal" is fiction.
Another reflection I do is that the time needed for the authorities to
give her the second rejection (on her appeal)is that six months is an
unusually long period of time. It would have been very interesting to see
that appeal in it's entirety, she must have given them something to think
hard of..unfortunately this is not possible as all such information is
confidential.
And like I said, I will have the dates in writing from the authorities
shortly.
Best regards,
Glenn Viklund
<quote off>
.John
Fancy that. :-)
Information may be coming from two other sources on this soon as well.
Barb :-)
John McAdams
2008-12-13 20:57:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13 Dec 2008 15:25:09 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
I know you don't want to pass up the opportunity to hammer her as far
into the ground as you can, Barb. What a lovely person.
If she doesn't want to be "hammered," Martin, maybe she should quit
lying.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 22:01:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 14:57:55 -0600, John McAdams
Post by John McAdams
On 13 Dec 2008 15:25:09 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
I know you don't want to pass up the opportunity to hammer her as far
into the ground as you can, Barb. What a lovely person.
If she doesn't want to be "hammered," Martin, maybe she should quit
lying.
That too. :-) She put herself in this position, but Martin is the one
who keeps promoting whatever she says sans doing any verification. He
just laps up all the stories and the excuses and runs with them.
That's not doing her any favors.

Barb :-)
Post by John McAdams
.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 21:59:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Wake up, Martin ... it's you wielding the hammer by continuiung and
escalating the nonsense. A real friend wouldn't continue with new
explanations that make no sense. You never seem to realize that and
just keep on going with whatever she tells you.

Additional and final confirmation from the official Swedishgovet body
is all we should be waiting for at this point. It's over. Do Judyth a
favor and let it die ... too much to hope you could actually admit you
were, at the very least, misinformed on this one and ran with what you
only had from Judyth.

Time to turn a corner, Martin. Your actions don't bespeak concern for
Judyth's well being at al. You just keep helping her shovel.

On 13 Dec 2008 15:25:09 -0500, "Martin Shackelford"
Post by Martin Shackelford
I know you don't want to pass up the opportunity to hammer her as far
into the ground as you can, Barb. What a lovely person.
Martin
Post by Barb Junkkarinen
Post by John McAdams
This is from an e-mail correspondent in Sweden, the fellow who tipped me
off to the article that says that Judyth did not get asylum.
<Quote on>
Hi John,
I received some information on JVB today (I will have all of this in
writing at the latest by this coming Monday).
These are facts, coming directly from an immigration official here in
Sweden through a phone conversation this morning (and as I'm sure you can
imagine, when it comes to asylum issues, not much of the information in an
application is publicly available, almost all of the info in such a matter
is strictly confidential).
What you see below is publicly available (some of it after some
consideration on the part of this official, I might add..)
Arrived in Sweden in September of 2007.
She applied for asylum that same month.
Her asylum application was rejected in November of 2007.
By the 28th of November 2007, she appealed this decision.
Her appeal was rejected 2nd of June this year, 2008.
This last decision could in theory be appealed also, but she didn´t.
She left Sweden on the 14th of July, 2008.
No new application of asylum has been received by Swedish immigration
authorities from JVB after this date.
- - - - -
In other words, if she still somehow has managed to get her way back into
Sweden, she is staying here illegally. The "granted appeal" discussed in
the forum does not relate to Sweden, period. So unless it relates to some
other country where she's gone through this same procedure after July 14th
of this year, the "granted appeal" is fiction.
Another reflection I do is that the time needed for the authorities to
give her the second rejection (on her appeal)is that six months is an
unusually long period of time. It would have been very interesting to see
that appeal in it's entirety, she must have given them something to think
hard of..unfortunately this is not possible as all such information is
confidential.
And like I said, I will have the dates in writing from the authorities
shortly.
Best regards,
Glenn Viklund
<quote off>
.John
Fancy that. :-)
Information may be coming from two other sources on this soon as well.
Barb :-)
Anthony Marsh
2008-12-13 01:44:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
This is from an e-mail correspondent in Sweden, the fellow who tipped me
off to the article that says that Judyth did not get asylum.
<Quote on>
Hi John,
I received some information on JVB today (I will have all of this in
writing at the latest by this coming Monday).
These are facts, coming directly from an immigration official here in
Sweden through a phone conversation this morning (and as I'm sure you can
imagine, when it comes to asylum issues, not much of the information in an
application is publicly available, almost all of the info in such a matter
is strictly confidential).
What you see below is publicly available (some of it after some
consideration on the part of this official, I might add..)
Arrived in Sweden in September of 2007.
She applied for asylum that same month.
Her asylum application was rejected in November of 2007.
By the 28th of November 2007, she appealed this decision.
Her appeal was rejected 2nd of June this year, 2008.
This last decision could in theory be appealed also, but she didn´t.
She left Sweden on the 14th of July, 2008.
No new application of asylum has been received by Swedish immigration
authorities from JVB after this date.
- - - - -
In other words, if she still somehow has managed to get her way back into
Sweden, she is staying here illegally. The "granted appeal" discussed in
the forum does not relate to Sweden, period. So unless it relates to some
other country where she's gone through this same procedure after July 14th
of this year, the "granted appeal" is fiction.
Another reflection I do is that the time needed for the authorities to
give her the second rejection (on her appeal)is that six months is an
unusually long period of time. It would have been very interesting to see
that appeal in it's entirety, she must have given them something to think
hard of..unfortunately this is not possible as all such information is
confidential.
And like I said, I will have the dates in writing from the authorities
shortly.
Best regards,
Glenn Viklund
<quote off>
.John
You love rumor and slander instead of documents.
Post by John McAdams
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Barb Junkkarinen
2008-12-13 03:35:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12 Dec 2008 20:44:45 -0500, Anthony Marsh
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
This is from an e-mail correspondent in Sweden, the fellow who tipped me
off to the article that says that Judyth did not get asylum.
<Quote on>
Hi John,
I received some information on JVB today (I will have all of this in
writing at the latest by this coming Monday).
These are facts, coming directly from an immigration official here in
Sweden through a phone conversation this morning (and as I'm sure you can
imagine, when it comes to asylum issues, not much of the information in an
application is publicly available, almost all of the info in such a matter
is strictly confidential).
What you see below is publicly available (some of it after some
consideration on the part of this official, I might add..)
Arrived in Sweden in September of 2007.
She applied for asylum that same month.
Her asylum application was rejected in November of 2007.
By the 28th of November 2007, she appealed this decision.
Her appeal was rejected 2nd of June this year, 2008.
This last decision could in theory be appealed also, but she didn´t.
She left Sweden on the 14th of July, 2008.
No new application of asylum has been received by Swedish immigration
authorities from JVB after this date.
- - - - -
In other words, if she still somehow has managed to get her way back into
Sweden, she is staying here illegally. The "granted appeal" discussed in
the forum does not relate to Sweden, period. So unless it relates to some
other country where she's gone through this same procedure after July 14th
of this year, the "granted appeal" is fiction.
Another reflection I do is that the time needed for the authorities to
give her the second rejection (on her appeal)is that six months is an
unusually long period of time. It would have been very interesting to see
that appeal in it's entirety, she must have given them something to think
hard of..unfortunately this is not possible as all such information is
confidential.
And like I said, I will have the dates in writing from the authorities
shortly.
Best regards,
Glenn Viklund
<quote off>
.John
You love rumor and slander instead of documents.
Cripes, you had the document and didn't even bother to translate it!

The document agrees with what this Swedish gentlemen who spoke to an
official at the department said.

The documenmt is a call for her to come in and talk about her
leeaving, heading out, hitting the susty trail ... her "jorney home"
or "repatriation."

Too bad slapstick is dead ... you three could have a career.
Post by Anthony Marsh
Post by John McAdams
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
i***@kpnmail.nl
2008-12-14 18:57:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by John McAdams
This is from an e-mail correspondent in Sweden, the fellow who tipped me
off to the article that says that Judyth did not get asylum.
<Quote on>
Hi John,
I received some information on JVB today (I will have all of this in
writing at the latest by this coming Monday).
These are facts, coming directly from an immigration official here in
Sweden through a phone conversation this morning (and as I'm sure you can
imagine, when it comes to asylum issues, not much of the information in an
application is publicly available, almost all of the info in such a matter
is strictly confidential).
What you see below is publicly available (some of it after some
consideration on the part of this official, I might add..)
Arrived in Sweden in September of 2007.
She applied for asylum that same month.
Her asylum application was rejected in November of 2007.
By the 28th of November 2007, she appealed this decision.
Her appeal was rejected 2nd of June this year, 2008.
This last decision could in theory be appealed also, but she didn´t.
She left Sweden on the 14th of July, 2008.
No new application of asylum has been received by Swedish immigration
authorities from JVB after this date.
- - - - -
In other words, if she still somehow has managed to get her way back into
Sweden, she is staying here illegally. The "granted appeal" discussed in
the forum does not relate to Sweden, period. So unless it relates to some
other country where she's gone through this same procedure after July 14th
of this year, the "granted appeal" is fiction.
Another reflection I do is that the time needed for the authorities to
give her the second rejection (on her appeal)is that six months is an
unusually long period of time. It would have been very interesting to see
that appeal in it's entirety, she must have given them something to think
hard of..unfortunately this is not possible as all such information is
confidential.
And like I said, I will have the dates in writing from the authorities
shortly.
Best regards,
Glenn Viklund
<quote off>
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Pagehttp://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Dear John,

This is clear enough regarding this issue included i have tried to get
in contact with JVB, because there are still some personal items here
from JVB but most important are the audio tapes from her mom and dad,
and i believe that she has the right and also because it is from her
mom and dad that she gets these tapes ASAP.

The problem is we only give these tapes to her personly and not giving
them to someone else first, therefore we hope that somebody in here
can contact her about this issue. She can reach us by email
***@kpnmail.nl ....
Further i don't understand why it keeps on going about "does judy
tells the truth or not" so far i can read there is a lot of NOT
believe and trying to make her black, the other part is just trying to
proof that she is telling the truth. As for myself i saw money hunters
just to get her book even if it is fiction as long if they get money
out of it, and if it is the truth they don't care about the problems
she may face. However as you might know if the CIA or other
organisation want her it would already have happen a long time
ago...just 1 mile from here we have AFNORTH an communication center
and the AWACS, and if they would have looked (searched) for her at the
time she was here they would have found her. It did not happen but
people made her scared and she started to run again, there is more but
i will not post that here.. if somebody has a question just mail me.

Respectfully,
Frans Lupschen
Loading...