I published the following, and Backes is accusing me of claiming that Oswald actually wrote the letter:
"The Idiot Backes agrees that Oswald's supposed letter to the Russian Embassy is a forgery. But, he doesn't think it's particularly important that Oswald wrote of being there at the meeting when Hosty visited Marina at Ruth Paine's house in Irving. The fact that the person who wrote the letter (as Oswald) referred to the meeting taking place in Dallas with him (Oswald) present is insignificant to Backes, even though it would have been a bold-faced lie for Oswald to write that."
Because of my phrasing in saying that "Oswald wrote of being at the meeting..." Backes assumes I really think Oswald wrote it- even though I referred to it as 'Oswald's supposed letter.'
It's what's called the subjunctive mood in writing. In the letter, it was, supposedly, Oswald writing about attending a meeting with Agent Hosty- which he did not do. And I used that to challenge the authenticity of the letter. So, although, superficially and apparently, it was Oswald writing it, it doesn't mean that I think it was really Oswald. I'm sure it was apparent to everyone except Backes that I was disputing the idea that it was Oswald.
You are making a big stink about nothing, Backass. I have no revisions to make. My meaning was, and is, clear and unambiguous. You're just a freaking moron.
But, speaking of revisions, what about this?
"There is a handwritten draft letter from which Ruth Paine created the typed version."
That's what you claimed, Backes, but where is the evidence for it? Here is Marina Oswald's testimony in which she claimed that Oswald typed it- using Ruth Paine's typewriter.
Mr. RANKIN. I offer in evidence Exhibit 15.
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 15, and received in evidence.)
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I think in the examination about this letter, if I would circulate it to the Commission it would be a little clearer what it is all about--if you could have a moment or two to examine it, I think it would help in your understanding of the examination.
Mrs. OSWALD. This was typed on the typewriter belonging to Ruth.
Mr. RANKIN. You can tell that by the looks of the typing, can you, Mrs. Oswald?
Mrs. OSWALD. No, I don't know, but I know that he was typing there. I don't know what he was typing.
Mr. RANKIN. And it is Ruth Paine's typewriter that you are referring to, when you say Ruth?
Mrs. OSWALD. Ruth Paine. Because Lee did not have a typewriter, and it is hardly likely that he would have had it typed somewhere else.
Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit 16, which purports to be the envelope for the letter, Exhibit 15. Have you ever seen that?
Mrs. OSWALD. The envelope I did see. I did not see the letter, but I did see the envelope. Lee had retyped it some 10 times or so.
Backes claimed that Ruth Paine typed it without a shred of evidence. He also claimed that there was "another African-American" at the TSBD steps without a shred of evidence. And even when he's proven wrong, he doesn't correct his mistakes.
That's because being stupid means never having to say you're sorry or that you're wrong.
I should add that just because I cited Marina's testimony in which she claimed to see Oswald type the letter doesn't mean I accept it. I have said repeatedly that Marina was like an MK-ULTRA subject: under mind control. SHE SAID WHATEVER THEY WANTED HER TO SAY.
She even said that Oswald asked her to join him in hijacking a plane to Cuba, in which she was expected to tote a gun in one hand and hold her little girl's hand in the other. That's what Marina said, but do you think Oswald said it? Do you think he was that crazy? He was NOT that crazy. Hopefully, before she dies, Marina is going to face facts about what she did and what she said. She needs to do it before the Grim Reaper gets her, or else it will be too late, and that would be a tragedy.