Sunday, October 16, 2016

The Evil and Stupid Joseph Backes

Backes is now claiming that the short man whom Oswald was talking to in the hallway, meaning this guy:

was FBI Agent Nat Pinkston:

Now, why would Oswald be talking to Nat Pinkston? He didn't know Nat Pinkston. James Bookhout attended most of Oswald's interrogations. So, Oswald got to know him. But, Nat Pinkston didn't attend a single one. As far as we know, Oswald and Pinkston never interacted. So, why would Oswald go up to him in the hall and say something that was obviously mid-conversation?

Nat Pinkston is the one who supposedly traced Oswald's ordering of the rifle to Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago. Of course, it's all nonsense. Oswald didn't order or own any rifle. Here John Armstrong demolished the whole Klein-ordering bull shit:

But, that's what Nat Pinkston was up to that Saturday, recruiting one Ruby Goldstein of Honest Joe's Pawn Shop to help him, as described here:

So, why and how could Nat Pinkston be in the hallway of the P.D. with Oswald as he was being led into his Saturday evening interrogation?

He couldn't.  He didn't. And, that is what it was all about. We can see the short guy in the Fedora hat following Oswald and the detectives into the office for that interrogation.

So, you see the open door ahead of them, and that guy turns into it, as he followed Oswald and the detectives who were leading him into the office for the interrogation. This was for the Saturday 6:30 PM interrogation. Now, who attended that interrogation? Well, we know damn well that Nat Pinkston didn't. He definitely didn't. He didn't attend any of the Oswald interrogations. James Bookhout attended most of them- all but one that I know of, assuming there was an interview on Friday evening. And, Bookhout admitted specifically that he attended that one. And Fritz wrote down that "B.O." asked Oswald a question at that interrogation about his Alex Hidell ID. It's in the Fritz Notes. 

There isn't a snowball's chance in Hell that that short man is Nat Pinkston. Once again, I have proven the stupid, moronic Joseph Backes to be wrong, and not just wrong but idiotically wrong. 

So, how long is going to leave that up there that that guy was Nat Pinkston? Probably indefinitely. He hasn't even taken down the ridiculous claim about finding the muzzle flash.


Plus you can plainly see in the images Backes put up that Nat Pinkston was not particularly short. He was of average height, and too tall to be the pipsqueak in the hallway. 

Backes is no better at recognizing heights than he is at recognizing ages.

As for Bookhout's light hair in the hallway clip:

It's true that it looks lighter than the Shooter's, but we know the Shooter's hair was doctored. Look how long it is in the Jackson photo.

If you were going to address the issue of hair, wouldn't you start with this? Because Ruby's hair wasn't this long, nor was his trim in back anything like this.

So, shouldn't Backes be more concerned about that? But no, the Idiot worries about the color difference between these two:

On very solid grounds, I deny the authenticity of this image because in 1963, men did not wear their hair this long:

Either the shooter was wearing a toupee' or it was done photographically. And if Backes is going to beef about the color difference between these two:

What about the much worse, much more extreme disparity to Jack Ruby? 

Joseph Backes is EVIL. He is so corrupt and so incredibly stupid, that he keeps making these bull in the china shop pronouncements only to have them destroyed by me, but he remains unfazed, as he moves on to the next one.  

You are despicable scum, Backes. You are the epitome' of the Kennedy-killer. And your role in aiding and abetting and protecting his killers as you stumble along in your lunacy will be noted. 
You think you're famous for your ARRB bull shit? That's nothing. Absolutely nothing.  

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.