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

OK, So here is the situation now concerning Hank Sienzant: 

He refuses to say now whether his real name is Hank Sienzant. 

But, just two days ago, he said this:

"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."

Now, the obvious implication of that is that he used an alias back then to ease the concerns of his then wife but that he's not doing so today; that Hank Sienzant is his real name. 

The whole gist of it is that he was distinguishing between what he did then and what he is doing now. He definitely implied that he is no longer doing that, using an alias, that it was just something he did then. 

But, imagine if he made that statement, implying what it does, when the reality is that he is still using an alias. That is lying; it's just an indirect way of lying. It's what you call "lying with an out". He left himself an escape hatch because he didn't directly say that he wasn't still doing it, using an alias. He just implied that he is no longer doing it. And it is a very definite implication. Nobody would take it any other way. His statement definitely sent the message that he was no longer using an alias. 

But, when he is asked DIRECTLY if his real name is Hank Sienzant, he refuses to answer. Why? It's because that would be a direct lie. He doesn't mind lying by implication, but he's afraid to directly lie, to make a declarative statement that is polar-opposite to the truth, that is the negation of the truth. 

But, take it further: I've been calling him Sienfake for a long time. He certainly can't like it. If he really is Hank Sienzant, why not say so? He has indirectly and many times. But, why not answer the question directly?

And don't tell me you are concerned about your safety. Don't you think I am concerned about my safety? Isn't John McAdams concerned about his? You have already implied that you are Hank Sienzant so why not say it directly and openly? How are you going to be less safe by saying it after you have already implied it? If your name is really Hank Sienzant, what is so terrible about saying so?