It is astounding that Richard Sprague wrote that letter- not just claiming that Doorman’s arm was actually the arm of a black man waving from the sidewalk- but stating it categorically- as though he was God or the King of Siam. He provided not one bit of evidence. He didn’t show any images, and he didn’t even reference any images. He didn’t even provide a means by which a person could look it up. I wonder: when Backes read Sprague’s letter and decided to believe it, did he at least look for the image of the other black man? Did he ask around to find out if anybody else knew what Sprague was talking about? Or did he just accept it unthinkingly? Well, he didn’t accept it at all until today, because until today, he disagreed with Sprague. Backes was claiming- for a long time- that it WAS the arm of the black guy that we see in the Altgens photo, Roy Lewis. But, I guess Backes realized that that boat wasn’t going to float, so he jumped ship to Sprague’s position. But, how could he do that without first substantiating what Sprague had said by finding the image to which he was referring? Backes obviously didn’t do it because he surely would have posted the image if he found it. Am I right? Are you scrambling for it now, Backes? Well, you do that, and you stay up all night if you have to. The audacity, the nerve, the unmitigated gall of people like Sprague and Backes disgusts me. These sophists aren’t researchers. They don’t add to the understanding of the JFK assassination; they subtract from it.
Posted on: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 03:36:22 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015