Backes says I can't find a link other than the spelling of the surname, but what about this link?
Backes doesn't get it: the pictures rule. It's just like with the Altgens photo: when you see that Doorman is wearing Oswald's exact clothes: the loose-fitting, unbuttoned, outer shirt over the notched, highly exposed white t-shirt, you know it's Oswald. It's his garb.
It can't not be him; it's his clothes. It's not as though Lovelady dressed like that; only Oswald did.
And with Arce, it's not as though Backes faults the likeness of the images. He doesn't say a word about it. He simply refuses to look at it, to acknowledge it. He just closes his eyes and puts his hands over his ears about it, and why? It's because he doesn't want it to be Arce.
Apparently, Backes doesn't want the CIA to be involved in the JFK assassination. He calls himself a CT but notice that he never lays out his theory of the crime. Who was involved? Was LBJ? Not according to Backes. Was George HW Bush? Not according to Backes. Was J Edgar Hoover? When has Backes ever accused Hoover? Was Congressman Albert Thomas who winked at LBJ after the swearing-in? The Wink of the Century? Backes doesn't see that either.
Who has Backes ever faulted? He's faulted the Dallas Police for making up a story about Oswald taking the bus and cab. But, how could they expect to get away with that? If Oswald had lived and gone to trial, he would have had a lawyer, a good lawyer. Look, Mark Lane wound up representing Oswald's mother pro bono; don't you think he would have been willing to represent Oswald? Mark Lane beat E Howard Hunt in a libel suit against Liberty Lobby. He's a great lawyer! And he would have asked Oswald what he did after the assassination and how he got to wherever he went. And Oswald would have told him the truth. Then, at trial, that elaborate lie of the Dallas Police would have unraveled, and it would been more than enough to establish reasonable doubt in the case. There was plenty more they had, but that alone would have been enough to win it. Lane and Oswald would have had them by the balls. How could the Dallas Police possibly expect to get away with such an outrageous and enormous lie? Oswald knew what he did and how he did it, and it would have been very easy to establish it. THE PHONY BUS AND CAB RIDE WOULD HAVE BECOME THE WHOLE CASE, THE BULWORK OF THE DEFENSE. Oswald would not have been on trial; the Dallas Police would have been on trial. It is stupid to think that they were that stupid to have done such a reckless and misguided thing.
And on whose authorization? The killing of Kennedy wasn't a Dallas Police Department operation. So, why would it befall on them to assume responsibility for such a dangerous lie?
Then, Backes has faulted the Warren Commission for making up whole swaths of testimony, inventing dialogue for Lovelady and Shelley, creating a whole "trek to the tracks" which according to Backes never occurred. But, such a brazen fabrication would have been bizarre and reckless. Yes, the WC was corrupt, but not like that; they were subtle about it.
And when has Backes made the slightest criticism of the HSCA? Look at the ridiculous conclusion they came to, that Oswald did it, but he had an accomplice on the Grassy Knoll who missed. So, there was a conspiracy, but it did not involve the FBI or the CIA or the Vice President, or any other agency or official of the government. Instead, according to the HSCA, it was the Mafia who put Oswald and his accomplice up to it.
But, could the Mafia get the parade route changed? Could the Mafia control the press? Could the Mafia accomplish the whitewash and coverup within the government? Could the Mafia control how the autopsy went?
And notice that they never alluded to any payment to Oswald for doing this dastardly job for the Mafia. Apparently, Oswald did his work for the Mafia for free- without being paid, even though he had absolutely nothing against Kennedy and was dirt poor. He just killed whomever the Mafia wanted killed because he was a Mafia man. And why the Mafia would assign Oswald to do this very difficult shooting was also not explained. Oswald was not an expert marksman, and he was not any kind of assassin. He wasn't qualified for it- not as a shooter and not as a killer, never having killed. He was never in combat in the Marines. He had never shot at a moving target- in his life. He never shot under super-tense, rapid-fire conditions. How could the Mafia put a high-powered rifle in his hands and have him start shooting in the direction of Jackie and Nellie and others they didn't want dead? Things go wrong in shootings. Didn't they know that?
And now Backes wants to defend Danny Arce, even though we can plainly see him at a CIA training camp for anti-Castro Cubans in Florida. Every CT in the world knows that anti-Castro Cubans were involved in the JFK assassination. It was central to the plot. Wasn't Jack Ruby a gun runner for the anti-Castro Cubans? What about the Houston, the Barbara, and the Zapata, the three ships involved in the Bay of Pigs invasion? Do those names mean anything to you, Backes? Are they associated with anyone you can think of?
Why was Danny Arce wearing that heavy coat in Dealey Plaza? It was a warm day. He'd been doing heavy work on the 6th floor laying flooring. What would have possessed him to put that heavy coat on afterwards to watch the motorcade?
Why was Joseph Ball willing to risk everything on Arce's testimony? With Arce, Ball was direct as hell. He didn't beat around the bush. He went for the jugular. "You see this guy here? Who is he?" Ball didn't do that with Lovelady.
Mr. BALL. Just 1 minute, I want to show you a picture. I show you Commission Exhibit No. 369. I show you this picture. See this man in this picture?
Mr. ARCE. Yeah.
Mr. BALL. Recognize him?
Mr. ARCE. Yes, that's Billy Lovelady.
Mr. BALL. Just to identify it clearly, the man on the steps---well, you see the man on the steps, do you not?
Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. He is a white man, isn't he?
Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And you see his picture just above the picture of two colored people, is that correct; would you describe it like that?
Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. I am not going to mark this purposely because other witnesses have to see it.
Mr. ARCE. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Did you say that is Billy Lovelady?
Mr. ARCE. Yes, that is Billy Lovelady.
Mr. BALL. Now, there is only one face that is clearly shown within the entrance-way of the Texas School Book Depository Building, isn't there?
Mr. ARCE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And only one face of a person who is standing on the steps of the Depository Building entrance?
Mr. ARCE. Yeah.
Mr. BALL. And that one man you see there---
Mr. ARCE. Yes, that's Billy Lovelady.
Mr. BALL. When you came to work that morning, Danny---
Danny? What the fuck? Danny? He didn't call Billy Lovelady Billy. Look how confident Ball was that "Danny" was going to deliver the answer he wanted. Look how certain he was that Danny was going to identify Doorman as Lovelady. You don't really think he took a chance on that, do you? You don't think Ball was gambling, do you? That he was rolling the dice? You don't think there is any doubt that Joseph Ball had foreknowledge of what Danny Arce's answer was going to be, do you?
Danny Arce was up to his neck in the JFK assassination. This is by James Richards:
Danny Arce was a young employee of the Texas School Book Depository. Not a great deal in known of his background, but after the assassination, he and Bonnie Ray Williams were taken in for questioning by the Dallas Police Department. Arce claimed that during the assassination, he was positioned near the Elm Street Extension that runs between the Texas School Book Depository and Elm Street proper. But, a man who resembled Arce was standing in front of the Dal-Tex building on Houston Street. Was he speaking into a radio device? The other individual is unknown, but his similarity to the man who trained with the Interpen group at No Name Key is striking.
This is not a Cinque thing, Backes. I am late in coming to it. You are fighting a lot of others besides me. Danny Arce was in on it, Backes. And so, in effect, are you. You are a modern-day Kennedy-killer.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.