Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

Here is the latest exchange on Amazon between me and Secret Agent Hank Sienzant, who formerly claimed to be the Vice President of Customer Relations for a software company.  

Hank Sienfake: 

"Ralph Cinque says: 'And what did I tell you about what the other people said? I told you that the WC was a show trial and that they would never allow anyone to say anything contrary to the official story.'  Except there's plenty of testimony and statements to the FBI in the Warren Commission volumes of evidence contrary to the official story. Like Jean Hill hearing four to six shots. Your claim that "the WC was a show trial and that they would never allow anyone to say anything contrary to the official story" is thereby shown as nonsense, without any basis in fact. 

'No one had the option of saying that they saw Oswald outside. Therefore, such controlled testimony is worthless. It was just a Stalinist show trial, that's all.'

Your assertion is unproven, and in fact, contrary evidence shows it is false.

'Oswald put himself "out with Bill Shelley in front" at the time of the assassination.'

No, he didn't. That's your spin on Fritz' notes, by taking them out of chronological order. Fritz' memorandum for the record shows they should be read in chronological order, in which case Oswald's supposed encounter with Shelley comes after he had lunch and after the lunchroom encounter with Baker. That means Oswald claimed he was inside the building having lunch at the time of the assassination. That also means he said he decided to go home after discussing it with Shelley AFTER the assassination.

That means your nonsense about Oswald being outside with Shelley during the shooting makes no sense.

Especially since you're now admitting that Oswald knew the difference between inside and outside. You tried to explain this by saying Oswald was inside on the steps like in a cave:

'Reporter: Did you shoot the President?
Oswald: I work in that building.
Reporter: Were you in the building at the time?
Oswald: Naturally if I work in that building, yes, sir.'

But now you admit Oswald could NOT have meant he was INSIDE on the steps. Because you're claiming Oswald's alibi was that he was "OUT with Bill Shelley in front."

So make up up your mind, Ralph.

Did Oswald know the difference between inside and outside?

Do you?

'That's what he told the police. That's what he said when it really mattered, when it was crucial. He wasn't testifying in the hallway to the reporter. That doesn't count, Sienfake, just as your denials of having lied about your identity don't count.'

According to you, Oswald told the police he was OUT with Bill Shelley in front, meaning during the assassination. That means your nonsense about Oswald being INSIDE like in a cave on the steps is baloney. Exposed as false by your own use of Fritz' notes.

'Why do you need to prove your identity? Well, the only reason I'm here is because Amazon forum pulls very well on the search engines for JFK search terms. If you do a Google search for Hank Sienzant what pulls on the first page is mostly my revelations of you being an agent, an operative.'

https://www.google.com/search?q=Hank+Sienzant&rlz=1C1FGGD_enUS501US507&oq=Hank+Sienzant&aqs=chrome.0.69i59l2.2840j0j8&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8 >>>

This the LOGICAL FALLACY known as a Non Sequitur. You ask the right question, but then fail to answer it. Why do I need to prove my identity to you or anyone else? Either you can rebut my arguments with facts or you can't. You can't, so instead you keep focusing on who I am. Your own actions expose your as having little confidence in your arguments.

'And I am going to keep hammering you, Sienfake. Even when HGR wrote to me about that other agent SV Anderson, he remarked about having seen my exposure of you as an agent. Your online reputation is that of a government agent, Sienfake, and I have no doubt that most people who have seen this believe that you are. And I'm going to keep going hammering it, Sienfake. I'm going to make you one of the most famous and familiar agents ever exposed.'

Hilarious. I'm just a private citizen with no governmental background whatsoever. I've spent a lot of time researching this case on my own. And thus, I know your claims are nonsense. Even most conspiracy theorists think you're too far out there for them.

'And I know why you don't prove your identity, Sienfake. It's because you are not Hank Sienzant, just as you were not Joe Zircon. Joe, Hank, you like those good old boy names, don't you. You're just a regular guy, aren't you?'

Yes. I used Joe Zircon as an alias because my first wife wanted me not to use my real name when posting on the internet. She said there were a lot of nuts out there.

Boy, was she ever right about that.

'Nobody should need an alias to discuss history.'

Says the man who posted here on Amazon in the past as *Linda Hadley* (pretending to be Linda) and Mark Cinque (admitting that was not his real name).

HILARIOUS!

'But then again, the JFK assassination is a very unique piece of history, isn't it? It's one that calls for people like you, doesn't it? How much do they pay you, Sienfake? $50,000? I bet it's more than that.'

As I posted on Prodigy two decades ago when I was first accused of being a government operative, I have a million dollar contract with the CIA. But I should have looked more closely at the terms. It pays me a million dollars, but it's a dollar a year for a million years!

Either you can rebut my points or not. You can't.

Oswald put himself in the doorway at the time of the assassination.

No, he didn't. Read the memoranda for the record by Fritz and Bookhout.

'He could ONLY have known that Bill Shelley was there by being there himself. How else? How possibly else could he have known that?'

He saw Shelley outside when he left the building about three minutes after the assassination, is one way he knew Shelley was outside.

'And why wouldn't he have gone outside?'

Because he was babysitting his rifle on the sixth floor. 

'Why would he have been any less inclined to go outside to see the President than the other 75 employees, the vast majoroity of whom were outside? '

His agenda was slightly different than that, Ralph.  Was this "Take Your Rifle to Work" day? 

'He was out there alright, and he was standing in the doorway, and we can see him.'

You are about the only person who can. None of the witnesses who were actually there, and whose statements are evidence - which yours are not - said they saw Oswald on the steps.

And Oswald put himself inside the building during the shooting.

'Reporter: Did you shoot the President?
Oswald: I work in that building.
Reporter: Were you in the building at the time?
Oswald: Naturally if I work in that building, yes, sir.'

Your claims are nonsense.
Ralph Cinque: 

OH MY God, you're really that stupid. Of course, the WC allowed SOME contrary testimony, such as people saying they heard shots from the Grassy Knoll. But, people can be wrong about the direction of sounds, so they allowed that and talked around it. The same is true for the number of shots. But, one cannot be wrong about a guy you know standing two feet away from you.

So, for the record, is it your contention that if someone had only said it, that the Warren Commission would have published in the Warren Report that Witness-X claimed that Oswald was standing in the doorway? That they would have put it in black and white? 

We're talking about a qualitative difference. All variations from the official story did some damage, but in the examples given, it was limited and tolerable. However, seeing Oswald in the doorway during the shooting would have done massive, fatal damage to the official story, and it was NOT allowed. Learn the difference between the two, Sienfake.

Regarding Fritz having written "Out with Bill Shelley", I have told you repeatedly that Oswald could not have meant when he was leaving because Shelley was not out there when he was leaving. Shelley left immediately for the railroad tracks with Lovelady, and they saw Marrion Baker climb the steps from a distance. Baker reached the steps within 15 seconds of the last shot! And then when they returned they went around to the back door and re-entered there and then were inside for a long time. So, Shelley could not have been outside when Oswald left for home. 

Shelley was certainly not out front 3 minutes after the assassination as you allege. And Shelley, himself, denied that any contact or sighting took place between him and Oswald after 11:50 AM that morning. So, this statement of yours is blatantly false:

"He saw Shelley outside when he left the building about three minutes after the assassination, is one way he knew Shelley was outside." 

No, Seinfake. That is grossly and diametrically wrong. Three minutes after the assassination, Shelley was NOT out front, and that is absolutely certain. 

But, it's great that you are not denying that Oswald did say "Out with Bill Shelley in front". You are just disputing WHEN he said it. But in saying it, he had to consider that they would check with Shelley. He had to have the presumption that Shelley would confirm it. Oswald could NOT have meant that he saw Shelley when he was leaving because Shelley wasn't out there then; his own testimony and Lovelady's testimony both deny that he was out there then; and he never claimed to be out there then. The only possible time that Oswald could have seen Shelley out front was the time when the motorcade passed.  

And we can visibly see that the notes were not chronological. 

Let's take them in written order. The first thing is:
"claims 2nd floor coke when off(icer) came in" and that is followed by "to 1st floor had lunch". Well, that isn't chronological right there. Elsewhere, Oswald said that he ate lunch in the domino room in sight of "Junior and a short negro", the latter being Harold Norman. We know that was before the assassination because we have a picture of Jarman and Norman during the assassination, up at the window on the 5th floor.

But, look at the notes again. Do you see the designation 1st and an arrow? What is the arrow pointing to? 

It's pointing to: "to 1st floor had lunch", so that came first. So, Fritz was telling us that eating lunch with the first thing that happened, and it was definitely before the shooting. But here's what Fritz told the WC:

Mr. FRITZ. Well, he told me that he was eating lunch with some of the employees when this (the assassination) happened.

By "other employees" he meant Jarman and Norman, but that was a lie. Fritz knew very well that Oswald referred to eating with them BEFORE the assassination. And it absolutely had to have been before the assassination because Jarman and Norman were somewhere else during the assassination.

Now, the only reason I used Linda's ID and then my son's is because, as you know, I was banned from Amazon forum, and it was the only way I could get on. I had to use their username and password (which they each voluntarily gave me) and wahlah! I was automatically going to show up as them! And it wasn't my desire. If I could have entered as myself as I'm doing now, I surely would have. It's not as though I had any wish to hide behind any other name. 

So, it is a false analogy that you are making between what I did and what you are doing. 

Now, listen up, Sienfake. I've got more I'm going to do to expose you, but before I do it, I want to know something for the record: 

Are you claiming that "Hank Sienzant" is your real name and not an alias, OR is it an alias like "Joe Zircon"? Answer the question, Sienfake. I'm going to proceed with what I'm going to do anyway, but I've give you a chance to answer that question first. 

Is, or is not, your real name Hank Sienzant? 

Sienfake claims that I am "about" the only person who can see that it's Oswald in the doorway, in which "about" covers everyone else who sees it, including: 

1) Oswald's own wife, who recognized him in the photo
2) Oswald's mother, who recognized him in the photo
3) Oswald's friend from the Marines, Anthony Botelho, who recognized him in the photo.
4) Oswald's friend from Russia, who recognized him in the photo
5) numerous researchers including Professor James Fetzer, Professor David Wrone, Professor Gerald McKnight, Professor James Norwood, Professor Jerry Kroth, Attorney Mark Lane, Attorney Vincent Salandria, and many more. All of these got subsumed in the word "about" by Hank Sienfake. 

Sienfake, the fact that you keep re-posting the exchange with the reporter only shows how empty and vacuous your case is; it's all you've got. When asked by police, Oswald said that he was "out with Bill Shelley in front". He was under no legal, moral, or argumentative obligation to qualify what the reporter said. It was said by the reporter, and in the larger context, Oswald was in the confines of the building at the time. 

But, in the final analysis, it doesn't matter what ANYBODY said, including Oswald. I wouldn't care if Oswald said he was in the bathroom taking a dump. It wouldn't change the fact that we can see him outside in the Altgens photo and in the Wiegman film.

Are you out of your mind? What kind of universe are you living in, Sienfake, that you think that there could be that much likeness in the man and the clothing between Lee Harvey Oswald and Billy Nolan Lovelady? You are living in the Bizarro World. 

Now, answer the question: 

Are you at this time claiming that your real name is Hank Sienzant?